linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/2] compiler.h: Introduce ptr

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: <ea02ce2ce8a348efa8d461f84f976478@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 17:11:05 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Alan Stern' <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, Jonas Oberhauser
	<jonas.oberhauser@...weicloud.com>
CC: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Linus Torvalds
	<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman
	<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
	<bigeasy@...utronix.de>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Will Deacon
	<will@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Boqun Feng
	<boqun.feng@...il.com>, John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>, Neeraj Upadhyay
	<Neeraj.Upadhyay@....com>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, "Joel
 Fernandes" <joel@...lfernandes.org>, Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, "Mark
 Rutland" <mark.rutland@....com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, "maged.michael@...il.com"
	<maged.michael@...il.com>, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>, Gary Guo
	<gary@...yguo.net>, "rcu@...r.kernel.org" <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, "lkmm@...ts.linux.dev"
	<lkmm@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] compiler.h: Introduce ptr_eq() to preserve address
 dependency

From: Alan Stern
> Sent: 30 September 2024 19:53
> 
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 07:05:06PM +0200, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
> >
> >
> > Am 9/30/2024 um 6:43 PM schrieb Alan Stern:
> > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 01:26:53PM +0200, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am 9/28/2024 um 4:49 PM schrieb Alan Stern:
> > > >
> > > > I should also point out that it is not enough to prevent the compiler from
> > > > using @a instead of @b.
> > > >
> > > > It must also be prevented from assigning @b=@a, which it is often allowed to
> > > > do after finding @a==@b.
> > >
> > > Wouldn't that be a bug?
> >
> > That's why I said that it is often allowed to do it. In your case it
> > wouldn't, but it is often possible when a and b are non-atomic &
> > non-volatile (and haven't escaped, and I believe sometimes even then).
> >
> > It happens for example here with GCC 14.1.0 -O3:
> >
> > int fct_hide(void)
> > {
> >     int *a, *b;
> >
> >     do {
> >         a = READ_ONCE(p);
> >         asm volatile ("" : : : "memory");
> >         b = READ_ONCE(p);
> >     } while (a != b);
> >     OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR(b);
> >     return *b;
> > }
> >
> >
> >
> >         ldr     r1, [r2]
> >         ldr     r3, [r2]
> >         cmp     r1, r3
> >         bne     .L6
> >         mov     r3, r1   // nay...
> 
> A totally unnecessary instruction, which accomplishes nothing other than
> to waste time, space, and energy.  But nonetheless, allowed -- I agree.
> 
> The people in charge of GCC's optimizer might like to hear about this,
> if they're not already aware of it...
> 
> >         ldr     r0, [r3] // yay!
> >         bx      lr
> 
> One could argue that in this example the compiler _has_ used *a instead
> of *b.  However, such an argument would have more force if we had
> described what we are talking about more precisely.

The 'mov r3, r1' has nothing to do with 'a'.
It is a more general problem that OPTIMISER_HIDE_VAR() pretty much
always ends up allocating a different internal 'register' for the
output and then allocating a separate physical rehgister.

There doesn't seem to be a later optimisation path to remove
'pointless' register moves.

	David

> 
> Yes, we do want to prevent compilers from doing this.  I'm not sure that
> it really needs to be mentioned in the comments or commit description,
> though.
> 
> Alan

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