linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH next v4 0/5] minmax: Relax type checks in min() and max().

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, 19 Jan 2024 08:14:14 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
 Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, "Jason A. Donenfeld"
 <Jason@...c4.com>, linux-media <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
 Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH next v4 0/5] minmax: Relax type checks in min() and max().

On 08. 01. 24, 19:19, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 at 03:46, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>>     CPP [M] drivers/media/pci/solo6x10/solo6x10-p2m.i
>> real    0m45,002s
>>
>> $ git revert 867046cc7027703f60a46339ffde91a1970f2901
>>     CPP [M] drivers/media/pci/solo6x10/solo6x10-p2m.i
>> real    0m11,132s
>>
>> $ git revert 4ead534fba42fc4fd41163297528d2aa731cd121
>>     CPP [M] drivers/media/pci/solo6x10/solo6x10-p2m.i
>> real    0m3,711s
> 
> Ouch. Yeah, that's unfortunate. There's a lot of nested nasty macro
> expansion there, but that timing is excessive.
> 
> Sparse actually complains about that file:
> 
>    drivers/media/pci/solo6x10/solo6x10-p2m.c:309:13: error: too long
> token expansion
>    drivers/media/pci/solo6x10/solo6x10-p2m.c:310:17: error: too long
> token expansion
> 
> and while that is a sparse limitation, it's still interesting. Having
> that file expand to 122M is not ok.
> 
> In this case, I suspect the right thing to do is to simply not use
> min()/max() in that header at all, but do something like
> 
>    --- a/drivers/media/pci/solo6x10/solo6x10-offsets.h
>    +++ b/drivers/media/pci/solo6x10/solo6x10-offsets.h
>    @@ -56,2 +56,5 @@
> 
>    +#define MIN(X, Y) ((X) < (Y) ? (X) : (Y))
>    +#define MAX(X, Y) ((X) > (Y) ? (X) : (Y))
>    +
>     #define SOLO_MP4E_EXT_ADDR(__solo) \
>    @@ -59,4 +62,4 @@
>     #define SOLO_MP4E_EXT_SIZE(__solo) \
>    -     max((..),                               \
>    -         min(((..) - \
>    +     MAX((..),                               \
>    +         MIN(((..) - \
>                   ..), 0x00ff0000))
>    @@ -67,4 +70,4 @@
>     #define SOLO_JPEG_EXT_SIZE(__solo) \
>    -     max(..,                         \
>    -         min(..)
>    +     MAX(..,                         \
>    +         MIN(..)
> 
> and avoid this issue.

So can someone pick up 20240113183334.1690740-1-aurelien@...el32.net so 
that we are done with this? I see neither Hans, nor Linus got to take it 
yet.

> That said, I'm sure this thing exists to a smaller degree elsewhere. I
> wonder if we could simplify our min/max type tests.
I assume we don't care with solo fixed? Hans pointed out ath11k too. 
Even if there is size increase in the preproc file, I don't see much of 
compile time increase there.

thanks,
-- 
js
suse labs