mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: YingChi Long <me@inclyc.cn>
Cc: chang.seok.bae@intel.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
	david.laight@aculab.com, hpa@zytor.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	ndesaulniers@google.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v3] x86/fpu: use _Alignof to avoid UB in TYPE_ALIGN
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 17:55:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2KhCyofvfG5W5hE@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221029122552.2855941-1-me@inclyc.cn>

On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 08:25:52PM +0800, YingChi Long wrote:
> WG14 N2350 made very clear that it is an UB having type definitions
> with in "offsetof".

Pls put the working group URL note here, not below in a Link tag.

Also, write out "UB" pls.

> This patch change the implementation of macro

Avoid having "This patch" or "This commit" in the commit message. It is
tautologically useless.

Also, do

$ git grep 'This patch' Documentation/process

for more details.

> "TYPE_ALIGN" to builtin "_Alignof" to avoid undefined behavior.

But you don't change the implementation of TYPE_ALIGN - you replace it
with _Alignof().

> I've grepped all source files to find any type definitions within
> "offsetof".
>
>     offsetof\(struct .*\{ .*,
>
> This implementation of macro "TYPE_ALIGN" seemes to be the only case
> of type definitions within offsetof in the kernel codebase.
>
> I've made a clang patch that rejects any definitions within
> __builtin_offsetof (usually #defined with "offsetof"), and tested
> compiling with this patch, there are no error if this patch applied.

What does that paragraph have to do with fixing the kernel?

Is this patch going to be part of clang? If so, which version?

Does gcc need it too?

If so, should a gcc bug be opened too?

> ISO C11 _Alignof is subtly different from the GNU C extension
> __alignof__. __alignof__ is the preferred alignment and _Alignof the
> minimal alignment. For 'long long' on x86 these are 8 and 4
> respectively.
> 
> The macro TYPE_ALIGN we're replacing has behavior that matches

Who's "we"?

> _Alignof rather than __alignof__.
> 
> Signed-off-by: YingChi Long <me@inclyc.cn>
> Link: https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2350.htm
> Link: https://godbolt.org/z/sPs1GEhbT

Put that link in the text above where you talk about the *align*
differences.

> Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Alignment.html
> Link: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133574

Aha, that's the clang patch. Put it in the text above too pls.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-11-02 16:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-25 15:31 [PATCH] x86/fpu: use __alignof__ " YingChi Long
2022-09-26  9:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-09-26 13:18   ` YingChi Long
2022-09-26 19:02     ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-09-27  8:20     ` David Laight
2022-09-27 15:33 ` [PATCH v2] x86/fpu: use _Alignof " YingChi Long
2022-09-27 15:58   ` David Laight
2022-09-27 16:44     ` YingChi Long
2022-09-27 17:07       ` YingChi Long
2022-09-28  8:09       ` David Laight
2022-09-28 11:23         ` YingChi Long
2022-10-05  7:29   ` YingChi Long
2022-10-05 18:30     ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-10-05 18:38       ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-10-05 18:57         ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-10-06  8:12           ` David Laight
2022-10-06 14:14 ` [PATCH v3] " YingChi Long
2022-10-06 17:34   ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-10-18  0:52   ` YingChi Long
2022-10-29 12:25   ` [PATCH RESEND " YingChi Long
2022-10-31 18:29     ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-11-02 16:55     ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2022-11-02 18:07       ` YingChi Long
2022-11-02 18:14       ` [PATCH v4] " YingChi Long
2022-11-02 21:41       ` [PATCH RESEND v3] " David Laight
2022-11-18  0:55       ` [PATCH RESEND v4] " Yingchi Long
2022-11-22 16:26 ` [tip: x86/fpu] x86/fpu: Use _Alignof to avoid undefined behavior " tip-bot2 for YingChi Long

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=Y2KhCyofvfG5W5hE@zn.tnic \
    --to=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=david.laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=me@inclyc.cn \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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 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®