linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] lib: zstd: Add cast to silence clang's -Wbitwise-instead-of-logical

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: <d21e97487ba3447194538ccf0e88ead9@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Oct 2021 10:34:31 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Nick Terrell' <terrelln@...com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
CC:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "llvm@...ts.linux.dev" <llvm@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] lib: zstd: Add cast to silence clang's
 -Wbitwise-instead-of-logical

From: Nick Terrell
> Sent: 26 October 2021 02:18
> 
> > On Oct 21, 2021, at 1:23 PM, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > A new warning in clang warns that there is an instance where boolean
> > expressions are being used with bitwise operators instead of logical
> > ones:
> >
> > lib/zstd/decompress/huf_decompress.c:890:25: warning: use of bitwise '&' with boolean operands [-
> Wbitwise-instead-of-logical]
> >                        (BIT_reloadDStreamFast(&bitD1) == BIT_DStream_unfinished)
> >                        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > zstd does this frequently to help with performance, as logical operators
> > have branches whereas bitwise ones do not.
...
> > The first U32 cast is to silence an instance of -Wshorten-64-to-32
> > because __builtin_expect() returns long so it cannot be moved.

Isn't enabling that warning completely stupid?
The casts required to silence it could easily cause more problems
- by hiding more important bugs. And seriously affect code readability.

...c
> > index 05570ed5f8be..5105e59ac04a 100644
> > --- a/lib/zstd/decompress/huf_decompress.c
> > +++ b/lib/zstd/decompress/huf_decompress.c
> > @@ -886,7 +886,7 @@ HUF_decompress4X2_usingDTable_internal_body(
> >             HUF_DECODE_SYMBOLX2_0(op2, &bitD2);
> >             HUF_DECODE_SYMBOLX2_0(op3, &bitD3);
> >             HUF_DECODE_SYMBOLX2_0(op4, &bitD4);
> > -            endSignal = (U32)LIKELY(
> > +            endSignal = (U32)LIKELY((U32)
> >                         (BIT_reloadDStreamFast(&bitD1) == BIT_DStream_unfinished)
> >                       & (BIT_reloadDStreamFast(&bitD2) == BIT_DStream_unfinished)
> >                       & (BIT_reloadDStreamFast(&bitD3) == BIT_DStream_unfinished)

Isn't that the same as:
	((BIT_reload() & BIT_reload() & BIT_reload()) == BIT_DStream_unfinished)
which will generate much better code.
Especially on cpu without 'seteq' instructions.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)