linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: will@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, yangyingliang@huawei.com,
	shenkai8@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] arm64: Rewrite __arch_clear_user()
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 12:31:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b1689c7f-6c61-41ca-0976-a32ceaa7eeeb@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210512104833.GD88854@C02TD0UTHF1T.local>

On 2021-05-12 11:48, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 05:12:38PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> Now that we're always using STTR variants rather than abstracting two
>> different addressing modes, the user_ldst macro here is frankly more
>> obfuscating than helpful.
> 
> FWIW, I completely agree; the user_ldst macros are a historical artifact
> and I'm happy to see them go!
> 
>> Rewrite __arch_clear_user() with regular
>> USER() annotations so that it's clearer what's going on, and take the
>> opportunity to minimise the branchiness in the most common paths, which
>> also allows the exception fixup to return a more accurate result.
> 
> IIUC this isn't always accurate for the {4,2,1}-byte cases; example
> below. I'm not sure whether that's intentional since the commit message
> says "more accurate" rather than "accurate".

Indeed, the "more" was definitely significant :)

>> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm64/lib/clear_user.S | 42 +++++++++++++++++++------------------
>>   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/lib/clear_user.S b/arch/arm64/lib/clear_user.S
>> index af9afcbec92c..1005345b4066 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/lib/clear_user.S
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/lib/clear_user.S
>> @@ -1,12 +1,9 @@
>>   /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
>>   /*
>> - * Based on arch/arm/lib/clear_user.S
>> - *
>> - * Copyright (C) 2012 ARM Ltd.
>> + * Copyright (C) 2021 Arm Ltd.
>>    */
>> -#include <linux/linkage.h>
>>   
>> -#include <asm/asm-uaccess.h>
>> +#include <linux/linkage.h>
>>   #include <asm/assembler.h>
>>   
>>   	.text
>> @@ -19,25 +16,30 @@
>>    *
>>    * Alignment fixed up by hardware.
>>    */
>> +	.p2align 4
>>   SYM_FUNC_START(__arch_clear_user)
> 
> Say we're called with size in x1 == 0x7
> 
>> -	mov	x2, x1			// save the size for fixup return
>> +	add	x2, x0, x1
>>   	subs	x1, x1, #8
>>   	b.mi	2f
> 
> ... here we'll skip to the 4-byte case at 2f ...
> 
>>   1:
>> -user_ldst 9f, sttr, xzr, x0, 8
>> +USER(9f, sttr	xzr, [x0])
>> +	add	x0, x0, #8
>>   	subs	x1, x1, #8
>> -	b.pl	1b
>> -2:	adds	x1, x1, #4
>> -	b.mi	3f
>> -user_ldst 9f, sttr, wzr, x0, 4
>> -	sub	x1, x1, #4
>> -3:	adds	x1, x1, #2
>> -	b.mi	4f
>> -user_ldst 9f, sttrh, wzr, x0, 2
>> -	sub	x1, x1, #2
>> -4:	adds	x1, x1, #1
>> -	b.mi	5f
>> -user_ldst 9f, sttrb, wzr, x0, 0
>> +	b.hi	1b
>> +USER(9f, sttr	xzr, [x2, #-8])
>> +	mov	x0, #0
>> +	ret
>> +
>> +2:	tbz	x1, #2, 3f
> 
> ... bit 2 is non-zero, so we continue ...
> 
>> +USER(9f, sttr	wzr, [x0])
> 
> ... and if this faults, the fixup will report the correct address ...
> 
>> +USER(9f, sttr	wzr, [x2, #-4])
> 
> ... but if this faults, teh fixup handler will report that we didn't
> copy all 7 bytes, rather than just the last 3, since we didn't update x0
> after the first 4-byte STTR.
> 
> We could update x0 inline, or add separate fixup handlers to account for
> that out-of-line.
> 
> If we think that under-estimating is fine, I reckon it'd be worth a
> comment to make that clear.

Indeed for smaller amounts there's no change in fixup behaviour at all, 
but I have to assume that underestimating by up to 100% is probably OK 
since we've been underestimating by fully 100% for nearly 10 years now. 
I don't believe it's worth having any more complexity than necessary for 
the fault case - grepping for clear_user() usage suggests that nobody 
really cares about the return value beyond whether it's zero or not, so 
the minor "improvement" here is more of a nice-to-have TBH.

The existing comment doesn't actually explain anything either, which is 
why I didn't replace it, but I'm happy to add something if you like.

Cheers,
Robin.

> 
> Thanks,
> Mark.
> 
>> +	mov	x0, #0
>> +	ret
>> +
>> +3:	tbz	x1, #1, 4f
>> +USER(9f, sttrh	wzr, [x0])
>> +4:	tbz	x1, #0, 5f
>> +USER(9f, sttrb	wzr, [x2, #-1])
>>   5:	mov	x0, #0
>>   	ret
>>   SYM_FUNC_END(__arch_clear_user)
>> @@ -45,6 +47,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__arch_clear_user)
>>   
>>   	.section .fixup,"ax"
>>   	.align	2
>> -9:	mov	x0, x2			// return the original size
>> +9:	sub	x0, x2, x0
>>   	ret
>>   	.previous
>> -- 
>> 2.21.0.dirty
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-12 11:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-11 16:12 [PATCH 0/8] arm64: String function updates Robin Murphy
2021-05-11 16:12 ` [PATCH 1/8] arm64: Import latest version of Cortex Strings' memcmp Robin Murphy
2021-05-12 13:28   ` Mark Rutland
2021-05-12 13:38     ` Robin Murphy
2021-05-12 14:51       ` Szabolcs Nagy
2021-05-26 10:17         ` Mark Rutland
2021-05-11 16:12 ` [PATCH 2/8] arm64: Import latest version of Cortex Strings' strcmp Robin Murphy
2021-05-11 16:12 ` [PATCH 3/8] arm64: Import updated version of Cortex Strings' strlen Robin Murphy
2021-05-11 16:12 ` [PATCH 4/8] arm64: Import latest version of Cortex Strings' strncmp Robin Murphy
2021-05-11 16:12 ` [PATCH 5/8] arm64: Add assembly annotations for weak-PI-alias madness Robin Murphy
2021-05-11 16:12 ` [PATCH 6/8] arm64: Import latest memcpy()/memmove() implementation Robin Murphy
2021-05-11 16:12 ` [PATCH 7/8] arm64: Better optimised memchr() Robin Murphy
2021-05-14 14:55   ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-14 18:38     ` Robin Murphy
2021-05-11 16:12 ` [PATCH 8/8] arm64: Rewrite __arch_clear_user() Robin Murphy
2021-05-12 10:48   ` Mark Rutland
2021-05-12 11:31     ` Robin Murphy [this message]
2021-05-12 13:06       ` Mark Rutland
2021-05-12 13:51         ` Robin Murphy
2021-05-14 11:57   ` [PATCH v2] " Robin Murphy
2021-05-26 11:15     ` Mark Rutland
2021-05-27 13:24       ` Robin Murphy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=b1689c7f-6c61-41ca-0976-a32ceaa7eeeb@arm.com \
    --to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=shenkai8@huawei.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yangyingliang@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).