linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3] x86: use builtins to read eflags

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]

Message-ID: <0d93ea4d847b42ca9c5603cb97cbda8a@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Feb 2022 09:14:49 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Nick Desaulniers' <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>
CC:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "llvm@...ts.linux.dev" <llvm@...ts.linux.dev>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] x86: use builtins to read eflags

From: Nick Desaulniers
> Sent: 07 February 2022 22:12
> 
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 4:57 PM Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > GCC and Clang both have builtins to read and write the EFLAGS register.
> > This allows the compiler to determine the best way to generate this
> > code, which can improve code generation.
> >
> > This issue arose due to Clang's issue with the "=rm" constraint.  Clang
> > chooses to be conservative in these situations, and so uses memory
> > instead of registers. This is a known issue, which is currently being
> > addressed.

How much performance would be lost by just using "=r"?

You get two instructions if the actual target is memory.
This might be a marginal code size increase - but not much,
It might also slow things down if the execution is limited
by the instruction decoder.

But on Intel cpu 'pop memory' is 2 uops, exactly the same
as 'pop register' 'store register' (and I think amd is similar).
So the actual execution time is exactly the same for both.

Also it looks like clang's builtin is effectively "=r".
Compiling:
long fl;
void native_save_fl(void) {
       fl = __builtin_ia32_readeflags_u64();
}
Not only generates a stack frame, it also generates:
pushf; pop %rax; mov mem, %rax.

	David

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