From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0265BC433DF for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 23:41:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mother.openwall.net (mother.openwall.net [195.42.179.200]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 56438206E9 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 2020 23:41:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="kH6JpuxO" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 56438206E9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kernel-hardening-return-19223-kernel-hardening=archiver.kernel.org@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 21650 invoked by uid 550); 6 Jul 2020 23:41:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kernel-hardening-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Received: (qmail 21618 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2020 23:41:49 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1594078897; bh=yuEVLSFWzFuIU16JSRCjoy4DCC3vZQD9mtnpRVx+k3Q=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=kH6JpuxO4VcDqDcyojdQfYGTHKg4PNOiHrbQiENKeoPSy0ZVSRSUp36IctVlrxCfg Py5tnQ3aqNWzAsUWq7cSTJZ9xs4GrC7bOF7ScnS6uyF1RxsPRZrbPsF6yIEB4yWmBX Q00WDW1a9kdhgxJoHkm8GLzgTCfs57TBHtdBC46w= Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2020 16:41:36 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Marco Elver , Nick Desaulniers , Sami Tolvanen , Masahiro Yamada , Will Deacon , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Kees Cook , clang-built-linux , Kernel Hardening , linux-arch , Linux ARM , Linux Kbuild mailing list , LKML , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/22] add support for Clang LTO Message-ID: <20200706234136.GS9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> References: <20200701150512.GH4817@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200701160338.GN9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200702082040.GB4781@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200702175948.GV9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200703131330.GX4800@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200703144228.GF9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200706162633.GA13288@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200706182926.GH4800@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200706183933.GE9247@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200706194012.GA5523@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200706194012.GA5523@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 09:40:12PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 11:39:33AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:29:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 09:26:33AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > If they do not consider their Linux OS running correctly :-) > > > > Many of them really do not care at all. In fact, some would consider > > Linux failing to run as an added bonus. > > This I think is why we have compiler people in the thread that care a > lot more. Here is hoping! ;-) > > > > Nevertheless, yes, control dependencies also need attention. > > > > > > Today I added one more \o/ > > > > Just make sure you continually check to make sure that compilers > > don't break it, along with the others you have added. ;-) > > There's: > > kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h: smp_cond_load_acquire(l, VAL); \ > kernel/sched/core.c: smp_cond_load_acquire(&p->on_cpu, !VAL); > kernel/smp.c: smp_cond_load_acquire(&csd->node.u_flags, !(VAL & CSD_FLAG_LOCK)); > > arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c: atomic_cond_read_acquire(&desc.refs, !VAL); > kernel/locking/qrwlock.c: atomic_cond_read_acquire(&lock->cnts, !(VAL & _QW_LOCKED)); > kernel/locking/qrwlock.c: atomic_cond_read_acquire(&lock->cnts, !(VAL & _QW_LOCKED)); > kernel/locking/qrwlock.c: atomic_cond_read_acquire(&lock->cnts, VAL == _QW_WAITING); > kernel/locking/qspinlock.c: atomic_cond_read_acquire(&lock->val, !(VAL & _Q_LOCKED_MASK)); > kernel/locking/qspinlock.c: val = atomic_cond_read_acquire(&lock->val, !(VAL & _Q_LOCKED_PENDING_MASK)); > > include/linux/refcount.h: smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(); > ipc/mqueue.c: smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(); > ipc/msg.c: smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(); > ipc/sem.c: smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(); > kernel/locking/rwsem.c: smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(); > kernel/sched/core.c: smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep(); > > kernel/events/ring_buffer.c:__perf_output_begin() > > And I'm fairly sure I'm forgetting some... One could argue there's too > many of them to check already. > > Both GCC and CLANG had better think about it. That would be good! I won't list the number of address/data dependencies given that there are well over a thousand of them. Thanx, Paul