linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/5] nolibc x86-64 string functions

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: <ZPHPJDXIkFfP5Eux@1wt.eu>
Date:   Fri, 1 Sep 2023 13:46:44 +0200
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:     "'Ammar Faizi'" <ammarfaizi2@...weeb.org>,
        Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>,
        Nicholas Rosenberg <inori@...x.org>,
        Alviro Iskandar Setiawan <alviro.iskandar@...weeb.org>,
        Michael William Jonathan <moe@...weeb.org>,
        GNU/Weeb Mailing List <gwml@...r.gnuweeb.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/5] nolibc x86-64 string functions

On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 11:34:18AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@...weeb.org>
> > Sent: 30 August 2023 14:57
> > 
> > This is an RFC patchset for nolibc x86-64 string functions. There are 5
> > patches in this series.
> > 
> > ## Patch 1-3: Use `rep movsb`, `rep stosb`, and `rep cmpsb` for:
> >     - memcpy() and memmove()
> >     - memset()
> >     - memcmp()
> > respectively. They can simplify the generated ASM code.
> > 
> ...
> > After this series:
> > ```
> >   000000000000140a <memmove>:
> >     140a: 48 89 f8              mov    %rdi,%rax
> >     140d: 48 89 d1              mov    %rdx,%rcx
> >     1410: 48 8d 7c 0f ff        lea    -0x1(%rdi,%rcx,1),%rdi
> >     1415: 48 8d 74 0e ff        lea    -0x1(%rsi,%rcx,1),%rsi
> >     141a: fd                    std
> >     141b: f3 a4                 rep movsb %ds:(%rsi),%es:(%rdi)
> >     141d: fc                    cld
> >     141e: c3                    ret
> 
> Isn't that completely broken?
> 
> You need to select between forwards and backwards moves.
> Since forwards moves are preferred it is best to do
> 	if (dst - src < len)
> 		backards_copy()
> 	else
> 		formwards_copy()
> 
> 	David

You're completely right indeed, reminds me about the copy_up/copy_down
that were not used anymore :-)

Willy