linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Improve memset

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CALCETrUkBCh8h66pJCJtDGNtvhmVaNuppddsBLkQiHFoNrW-xg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:13:48 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <mail@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Improve memset

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:30 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 10:41 AM Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > After some experimentation, I think y'all are just doing it wrong.
> > GCC is very clever about this as long as it's given the chance.  This
> > test, for example, generates excellent code:
> >
> > #include <string.h>
> >
> > __THROW __nonnull ((1)) __attribute__((always_inline)) void
> > *memset(void *s, int c, size_t n)
> > {
> >     asm volatile ("nop");
> >     return s;
> > }
> >
> > /* generates 'nop' */
> > void zero(void *dest, size_t size)
> > {
> >     __builtin_memset(dest, 0, size);
> > }
>
> I think the point was that we'd like to get the default memset (for
> when __builtin_memset() doesn't generate inline code) also inlined
> into just "rep stosb", instead of that tail-call "jmp memset".

Well, when I wrote this email, I *thought* it was inlining the
'memset' function, but maybe I just can't read gcc's output today.

It seems like gcc is maybe smart enough to occasionally optimize
memset just because it's called 'memset'.  This generates good code:

#include <stddef.h>

inline void *memset(void *dest, int c, size_t n)
{
    /* Boris' implementation */
    void *ret, *dummy;

    asm volatile("push %%rdi\n\t"
                     "mov %%rax, %%rsi\n\t"
                     "mov %%rcx, %%rdx\n\t"
                     "andl $7,%%edx\n\t"
                     "shrq $3,%%rcx\n\t"
                     "movzbl %%sil,%%esi\n\t"
                     "movabs $0x0101010101010101,%%rax\n\t"
                     "imulq %%rsi,%%rax\n\t"
                     "rep stosq\n\t"
                     "movl %%edx,%%ecx\n\t"
                     "rep stosb\n\t"
                     "pop %%rax\n\t"
                     : "=&D" (ret), "=c" (dummy)
                     : "0" (dest), "a" (c), "c" (n)
                     : "rsi", "rdx", "memory");

    return ret;
}

int one_word(void)
{
    int x;
    memset(&x, 0, sizeof(x));
    return x;
}

So maybe Boris' patch is good after all.