From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
To: "Jörn Engel" <joern@purestorage.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
Spencer Baugh <spencer.baugh@purestorage.com>
Subject: Re: round_up integer underflow
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 01:20:09 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150723222008.GA1743@p183.telecom.by> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150723181030.GC24876@Sligo.logfs.org>
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:10:30AM -0700, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:02:55AM -0700, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > Spencer spotted something nasty in the round_up macro. We were
> > wondering why round_up() worked differently from ALIGN. The only real
> > difference between the two patterns is overflow behaviour. And both
> > version are buggy when used for signed integer types, round_up will
> > underflow on INT_MIN, ALIGN will overflow on INT_MAX. Since signed
> > integer under/overflows are undefined, we might have subtle bugs lurking
> > in the kernel.
> >
> > This example program produces a warning when compiling with gcc -O2 or
> > higher. Clang doesn't warn. Compiled code behaves correctly with both
> > compilers, but that is largely luck and the same compilers may create
> > wrong behaviour if the surrounding code changes.
> >
> > #include <limits.h>
> > #include <stdio.h>
> >
> > #define __round_mask(x, y) ((__typeof__(x))((y)-1))
> > #define round_up(x, y) ((((x)-1) | __round_mask(x, y))+1)
> > #define round_down(x, y) ((x) & ~__round_mask(x, y))
> >
> > int main(void)
> > {
> > int i, r = 8;
> >
> > for (i = INT_MIN; i; i++) {
> > printf("%2x: %2x %2x\n", i, round_down(i, r), round_up(i, r));
> > }
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > I don't have a good answer yet. We could make round_up check for
> > negative numbers, but I would prefer unconditional code that optimizes
> > down to nothing. We could rewrite it in assembly, once for each
> > architecture.
> >
> > Does anyone have better ideas?
You can fix overflow issues but the ALIGN(INT_MAX, a) creating much
smaller value is probably a bug anyway. It should BUG_ON or something
(yes, I'm aware of recent memo).
> #define round_up(x, y) (__typeof__(x)(__round_up((unsigned __typeof__(x)(x)), (y))))
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If only... :-(
> I.e. cast x to the matching unsigned type where overflows are
> well-defined, do the rounding, then cast the result back to the original
> type.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-23 22:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-23 18:02 Jörn Engel
2015-07-23 18:10 ` Jörn Engel
2015-07-23 22:20 ` Alexey Dobriyan [this message]
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=20150723222008.GA1743@p183.telecom.by \
--to=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=joern@purestorage.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=spencer.baugh@purestorage.com \
--cc=yinghai@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®