All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
	alexanderduyck@fb.com, kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-um@lists.infradead.org, lkp@intel.com,
	peterz@infradead.org, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/core 1/1] arch/x86/um/../lib/csum-partial_64.c:98:12: error: implicit declaration of function 'load_unaligned_zeropad'
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 22:56:18 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFUsyfL3RF-UC-HBUcbRn0e5S3URo9gpz5V85buF8C7xVb6K7w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iJqZm9Mcfu+4-aZ_pZok1j4RsHK8YoFBVqjVYpGbt_P8Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 10:20 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 8:08 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 8:00 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It is an issue in general, not in standard cases because network
> > > headers are aligned.
> > >
> > > I think it came when I folded csum_partial() and do_csum(), I forgot
> > > to ror() the seed.
> > >
> > > I suspect the following would help:
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > > index 1eb8f2d11f7c785be624eba315fe9ca7989fd56d..ee7b0e7a6055bcbef42d22f7e1d8f52ddbd6be6d
> > > 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> > >         if (unlikely(odd)) {
> > >                 if (unlikely(len == 0))
> > >                         return sum;
> > > +               temp64 = ror32((__force u64)sum, 8);
> > >                 temp64 += (*(unsigned char *)buff << 8);
> > >                 len--;
> > >                 buff++;
> > >
> > >
> >
> > It is a bit late here, I will test the following later this week.
> >
> > We probably can remove one conditional jump at the end of the function
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > index 1eb8f2d11f7c785be624eba315fe9ca7989fd56d..15986ad42ed5ccb8241ff467a34188cf901ec98e
> > 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > @@ -41,9 +41,11 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> >         if (unlikely(odd)) {
> >                 if (unlikely(len == 0))
> >                         return sum;
> > +               temp64 = ror32((__force u64)sum, 8);
> >                 temp64 += (*(unsigned char *)buff << 8);
> >                 len--;
> >                 buff++;
> > +               odd = 8;
> >         }
> >
> >         while (unlikely(len >= 64)) {
> > @@ -129,10 +131,7 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> >  #endif
> >         }
> >         result = add32_with_carry(temp64 >> 32, temp64 & 0xffffffff);
> > -       if (unlikely(odd)) {
> > -               result = from32to16(result);
> > -               result = ((result >> 8) & 0xff) | ((result & 0xff) << 8);
> > -       }
> > +       ror32(result, odd);
>
> this would be
>           result = ror32(result, odd);
>
> definitely time to stop working today for me.
>
> >         return (__force __wsum)result;
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(csum_partial);

All my tests pass with that change :)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>
To: kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/core 1/1] arch/x86/um/../lib/csum-partial_64.c:98:12: error: implicit declaration of function 'load_unaligned_zeropad'
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 22:56:18 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFUsyfL3RF-UC-HBUcbRn0e5S3URo9gpz5V85buF8C7xVb6K7w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iJqZm9Mcfu+4-aZ_pZok1j4RsHK8YoFBVqjVYpGbt_P8Q@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2758 bytes --]

On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 10:20 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 8:08 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 8:00 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It is an issue in general, not in standard cases because network
> > > headers are aligned.
> > >
> > > I think it came when I folded csum_partial() and do_csum(), I forgot
> > > to ror() the seed.
> > >
> > > I suspect the following would help:
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > > index 1eb8f2d11f7c785be624eba315fe9ca7989fd56d..ee7b0e7a6055bcbef42d22f7e1d8f52ddbd6be6d
> > > 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> > >         if (unlikely(odd)) {
> > >                 if (unlikely(len == 0))
> > >                         return sum;
> > > +               temp64 = ror32((__force u64)sum, 8);
> > >                 temp64 += (*(unsigned char *)buff << 8);
> > >                 len--;
> > >                 buff++;
> > >
> > >
> >
> > It is a bit late here, I will test the following later this week.
> >
> > We probably can remove one conditional jump at the end of the function
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > index 1eb8f2d11f7c785be624eba315fe9ca7989fd56d..15986ad42ed5ccb8241ff467a34188cf901ec98e
> > 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > @@ -41,9 +41,11 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> >         if (unlikely(odd)) {
> >                 if (unlikely(len == 0))
> >                         return sum;
> > +               temp64 = ror32((__force u64)sum, 8);
> >                 temp64 += (*(unsigned char *)buff << 8);
> >                 len--;
> >                 buff++;
> > +               odd = 8;
> >         }
> >
> >         while (unlikely(len >= 64)) {
> > @@ -129,10 +131,7 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> >  #endif
> >         }
> >         result = add32_with_carry(temp64 >> 32, temp64 & 0xffffffff);
> > -       if (unlikely(odd)) {
> > -               result = from32to16(result);
> > -               result = ((result >> 8) & 0xff) | ((result & 0xff) << 8);
> > -       }
> > +       ror32(result, odd);
>
> this would be
>           result = ror32(result, odd);
>
> definitely time to stop working today for me.
>
> >         return (__force __wsum)result;
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(csum_partial);

All my tests pass with that change :)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
	alexanderduyck@fb.com, kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-um@lists.infradead.org, lkp@intel.com,
	peterz@infradead.org, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/core 1/1] arch/x86/um/../lib/csum-partial_64.c:98:12: error: implicit declaration of function 'load_unaligned_zeropad'
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 22:56:18 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFUsyfL3RF-UC-HBUcbRn0e5S3URo9gpz5V85buF8C7xVb6K7w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iJqZm9Mcfu+4-aZ_pZok1j4RsHK8YoFBVqjVYpGbt_P8Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 10:20 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 8:08 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 8:00 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It is an issue in general, not in standard cases because network
> > > headers are aligned.
> > >
> > > I think it came when I folded csum_partial() and do_csum(), I forgot
> > > to ror() the seed.
> > >
> > > I suspect the following would help:
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > > index 1eb8f2d11f7c785be624eba315fe9ca7989fd56d..ee7b0e7a6055bcbef42d22f7e1d8f52ddbd6be6d
> > > 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> > >         if (unlikely(odd)) {
> > >                 if (unlikely(len == 0))
> > >                         return sum;
> > > +               temp64 = ror32((__force u64)sum, 8);
> > >                 temp64 += (*(unsigned char *)buff << 8);
> > >                 len--;
> > >                 buff++;
> > >
> > >
> >
> > It is a bit late here, I will test the following later this week.
> >
> > We probably can remove one conditional jump at the end of the function
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > index 1eb8f2d11f7c785be624eba315fe9ca7989fd56d..15986ad42ed5ccb8241ff467a34188cf901ec98e
> > 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> > @@ -41,9 +41,11 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> >         if (unlikely(odd)) {
> >                 if (unlikely(len == 0))
> >                         return sum;
> > +               temp64 = ror32((__force u64)sum, 8);
> >                 temp64 += (*(unsigned char *)buff << 8);
> >                 len--;
> >                 buff++;
> > +               odd = 8;
> >         }
> >
> >         while (unlikely(len >= 64)) {
> > @@ -129,10 +131,7 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> >  #endif
> >         }
> >         result = add32_with_carry(temp64 >> 32, temp64 & 0xffffffff);
> > -       if (unlikely(odd)) {
> > -               result = from32to16(result);
> > -               result = ((result >> 8) & 0xff) | ((result & 0xff) << 8);
> > -       }
> > +       ror32(result, odd);
>
> this would be
>           result = ror32(result, odd);
>
> definitely time to stop working today for me.
>
> >         return (__force __wsum)result;
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(csum_partial);

All my tests pass with that change :)

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


  reply	other threads:[~2021-11-25  4:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-17 18:45 [tip:x86/core 1/1] arch/x86/um/../lib/csum-partial_64.c:98:12: error: implicit declaration of function 'load_unaligned_zeropad' kernel test robot
2021-11-17 18:45 ` kernel test robot
2021-11-17 18:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-17 18:55   ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-17 19:40   ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-17 19:40     ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-18 16:00     ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-18 16:00       ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-18 16:00       ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-18 16:26       ` Johannes Berg
2021-11-18 16:26         ` Johannes Berg
2021-11-18 16:26         ` Johannes Berg
2021-11-18 16:57         ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-18 16:57           ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-18 16:57           ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-18 17:02           ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-18 17:02             ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-18 17:02             ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  1:58           ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  1:58             ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  1:58             ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  2:56             ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  2:56               ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  2:56               ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  3:41               ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  3:41                 ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  3:41                 ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  4:00                 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  4:00                   ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  4:00                   ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  4:08                   ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  4:08                     ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  4:08                     ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  4:20                     ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  4:20                       ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  4:20                       ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  4:56                       ` Noah Goldstein [this message]
2021-11-25  4:56                         ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  4:56                         ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  5:09                         ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  5:09                           ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  5:09                           ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  6:32                           ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  6:32                             ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  6:32                             ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  6:45                             ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  6:45                               ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  6:45                               ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25  6:49                               ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  6:49                                 ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  6:49                                 ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  6:47                             ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  6:47                               ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-25  6:47                               ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-26 17:18                   ` David Laight
2021-11-26 17:18                     ` David Laight
2021-11-26 17:18                     ` David Laight
2021-11-26 18:09                     ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-26 18:09                       ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-26 18:09                       ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-26 22:41                       ` David Laight
2021-11-26 22:41                         ` David Laight
2021-11-26 22:41                         ` David Laight
2021-11-26 23:04                         ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-26 23:04                           ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-26 23:04                           ` Noah Goldstein
2021-11-28 18:30                           ` David Laight
2021-11-28 18:30                             ` David Laight
2021-11-28 18:30                             ` David Laight
2021-12-29  6:00       ` Al Viro
2021-12-29  6:00         ` Al Viro
2021-12-29  6:00         ` Al Viro
2022-01-31  2:29         ` Al Viro
2022-01-31  2:29           ` Al Viro
2022-01-31  2:29           ` Al Viro

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=CAFUsyfL3RF-UC-HBUcbRn0e5S3URo9gpz5V85buF8C7xVb6K7w@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=goldstein.w.n@gmail.com \
    --cc=alexanderduyck@fb.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-um@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.