linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: xor-neon: Replace __GNUC__ checks with CONFIG_CC_IS

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 31 May 2019 11:32:27 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
        Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: xor-neon: Replace __GNUC__ checks with
 CONFIG_CC_IS_GCC

On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:05:22AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> If I remember correctly, we also had the same issue with older versions
> of clang, possibly even newer ones. Shouldn't we check for a minimum
> compiler version when building with clang to ensure that the code is
> really vectorized?
> 
>        Arnd

Even on tip of tree, it doesn't look like vectorization happens
properly. With -S -Rpass-missed='.*' added to the xor-neon.c command:

/home/nathan/cbl/linux-next/include/asm-generic/xor.h:15:2: remark: the cost-model indicates that interleaving is not beneficial [-Rpass-missed=loop-vectorize]
/home/nathan/cbl/linux-next/include/asm-generic/xor.h:11:1: remark: List vectorization was possible but not beneficial with cost 0 >= 0 [-Rpass-missed=slp-vectorizer]
xor_8regs_2(unsigned long bytes, unsigned long *p1, unsigned long *p2)
^

So right now, it doesn't look like there is a minimum version for clang
and I don't think adding a warning for clang is productive (what is a
user supposed to do?)

Cheers,
Nathan