netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Fix struct page layout on 32-bit systems

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: <8d0fce1c-be7c-1c9b-bf5c-0c531db496ac@synopsys.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Apr 2021 21:14:12 +0000
From:   Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
CC:     Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>,
        "grygorii.strashko@...com" <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org" <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mips@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        "mhocko@...nel.org" <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "mgorman@...e.de" <mgorman@...e.de>,
        "brouer@...hat.com" <brouer@...hat.com>,
        "mcroce@...ux.microsoft.com" <mcroce@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        "linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Fix struct page layout on 32-bit systems

On 4/20/21 12:07 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 5:10 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 02:48:17AM +0000, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>>>> 32-bit architectures which expect 8-byte alignment for 8-byte integers
>>>> and need 64-bit DMA addresses (arc, arm, mips, ppc) had their struct
>>>> page inadvertently expanded in 2019.
>>> FWIW, ARC doesn't require 8 byte alignment for 8 byte integers. This is
>>> only needed for 8-byte atomics due to the requirements of LLOCKD/SCOND
>>> instructions.
>> Ah, like x86?  OK, great, I'll drop your arch from the list of
>> affected.  Thanks!
> I mistakenly assumed that i386 and m68k were the only supported
> architectures with 32-bit alignment on u64. I checked it now and found
>
> $ for i in /home/arnd/cross/x86_64/gcc-10.1.0-nolibc/*/bin/*-gcc ; do
> echo `echo 'int a = __alignof__(long long);' | $i -xc - -Wall -S -o- |
> grep -A1 a: | tail -n 1 | cut -f 3 -d\   `
> ${i#/home/arnd/cross/x86_64/gcc-10.1.0-nolibc/*/bin/} ; done
> 8 aarch64-linux-gcc
> 8 alpha-linux-gcc
> 4 arc-linux-gcc
> 8 arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc
> 8 c6x-elf-gcc
> 4 csky-linux-gcc
> 4 h8300-linux-gcc
> 8 hppa-linux-gcc
> 8 hppa64-linux-gcc
> 8 i386-linux-gcc
> 8 ia64-linux-gcc
> 2 m68k-linux-gcc
> 4 microblaze-linux-gcc
> 8 mips-linux-gcc
> 8 mips64-linux-gcc
> 8 nds32le-linux-gcc
> 4 nios2-linux-gcc
> 4 or1k-linux-gcc
> 8 powerpc-linux-gcc
> 8 powerpc64-linux-gcc
> 8 riscv32-linux-gcc
> 8 riscv64-linux-gcc
> 8 s390-linux-gcc
> 4 sh2-linux-gcc
> 4 sh4-linux-gcc
> 8 sparc-linux-gcc
> 8 sparc64-linux-gcc
> 8 x86_64-linux-gcc
> 8 xtensa-linux-gcc
>
> which means that half the 32-bit architectures do this. This may
> cause more problems when arc and/or microblaze want to support
> 64-bit kernels and compat mode in the future on their latest hardware,
> as that means duplicating the x86 specific hacks we have for compat.
>
> What is alignof(u64) on 64-bit arc?

$ echo 'int a = __alignof__(long long);' | arc64-linux-gnu-gcc -xc - 
-Wall -S -o - | grep -A1 a: | tail -n 1 | cut -f 3
8

Yeah ARCv2 alignment of 4 for 64-bit data was a bit of surprise finding 
for me as well. When 64-bit load/stores were initially targeted by the 
internal Metaware compiler (llvm based) they decided to keep alignment 
to 4 still (granted hardware allowed this) and then gcc guys decided to 
follow the same ABI. I only found this by accident :-)

Can you point me to some specifics on the compat issue. For better of 
worse, arc64 does''t have a compat 32-bit mode, so everything is 
64-on-64 or 32-on-32 (ARC32 flavor of ARCv3)

Thx,
-Vineet