linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] x86: prevent gcc from emitting rep movsq/stosq for inlined ops

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAFULd4bz1KvrcO14c8JouhpriNt2KudcwcWccuXD-b7yQ8rARw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2025 18:41:28 +0200
From: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>, 
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...hat.com, x86@...nel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86: prevent gcc from emitting rep movsq/stosq for
 inlined ops

On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 11:09 PM David Laight
<david.laight.linux@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 09:20:29 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 08:27:39AM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 8:13 AM Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 9:00 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 05, 2025 at 06:47:33PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > > > > > gcc is over eager to use rep movsq/stosq (starts above 40 bytes), which
> > > > > > comes with a significant penalty on CPUs without the respective fast
> > > > > > short ops bits (FSRM/FSRS).
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't suppose there's a magic compiler toggle to make it emit prefix
> > > > > padded 'rep movs'/'rep stos' variants such that they are 5 bytes each,
> > > > > right?
> > > > >
> > > > > Something like:
> > > > >
> > > > >    2e 2e 2e f3 a4          cs cs rep movsb %ds:(%rsi),%es:(%rdi)
> > > >
> > > > This won't fly, because gas complains:
> > > >
> > > > z.s: Assembler messages:
> > > > z.s:1: Error: same type of prefix used twice
> > >
> > > However, it is possible to use " cs ; cs ; cs ; rep movsb".
> >
> > Heh, the way I encoded it was:
> >
> >       .byte 0x2e, 0x2e, 0x2e
> >       rep movsb %ds:(%rsi), %es:(%rdi)
> >
> > GCC compiled it, and then objdump grokked it (although it outputs one CS
> > too few). Your variant is much nicer though.
> >
> > > We can add a compile flag to the compiler, and it will be able to emit
> > > the desired sequence.
>
> You want the compiler to use 'rep movsw', 'rep movsl' or 'rep movsq' if it knows
> the size is a multiple of 2, 4 or 8.
> Then you can substitute a suitable function.
> But replacing the 'rep movsb' with a call is much more flexible.
>
> You do need to allow for the REX prefix (rep movsq is f3 48 a5).
>
> I also suspect it would be neater to repeat the 'rep' prefix instead of
> using the 'cs' prefix.
>
> >
> > Thanks; Linus, this would be acceptable?
>
> Any compiler change isn't going to be useful in the short term.
> (Unless the kernel sources start including gcc.)

The discussion is moved to gcc mailing lists. Can please interested
parties continue the discussion at [1]?

[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-June/686813.html

Uros.