From: tip-bot for Linus Torvalds <tipbot@zytor.com>
To: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@kernel.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: [tip:x86/asm] x86: Replace assembly access_ok() with a C variant
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 17:00:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <tip-c5fe5d80680e2949ffe102180f5fc6cefc0d145f@git.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzPBdbfKovMT8Edr4SmE2_=+OKJFac9XW2awegogTkVTA@mail.gmail.com>
Commit-ID: c5fe5d80680e2949ffe102180f5fc6cefc0d145f
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/c5fe5d80680e2949ffe102180f5fc6cefc0d145f
Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
AuthorDate: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 15:30:58 -0800
Committer: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
CommitDate: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 16:58:17 -0800
x86: Replace assembly access_ok() with a C variant
It turns out that the assembly variant doesn't actually produce that
good code, presumably partly because it creates a long dependency
chain with no scheduling, and partly because we cannot get a flags
result out of gcc (which could be fixed with asm goto, but it turns
out not to be worth it.)
The C code allows gcc to schedule and generate multiple (easily
predictable) branches, and as a side benefit we can really optimize
the case where the size is constant.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CA%2B55aFzPBdbfKovMT8Edr4SmE2_=%2BOKJFac9XW2awegogTkVTA@mail.gmail.com
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h | 28 +++++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
index 8ec57c0..84ecf1d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
@@ -40,22 +40,28 @@
/*
* Test whether a block of memory is a valid user space address.
* Returns 0 if the range is valid, nonzero otherwise.
- *
- * This is equivalent to the following test:
- * (u33)addr + (u33)size > (u33)current->addr_limit.seg (u65 for x86_64)
- *
- * This needs 33-bit (65-bit for x86_64) arithmetic. We have a carry...
*/
+static inline int __chk_range_not_ok(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size, unsigned long limit)
+{
+ /*
+ * If we have used "sizeof()" for the size,
+ * we know it won't overflow the limit (but
+ * it might overflow the 'addr', so it's
+ * important to subtract the size from the
+ * limit, not add it to the address).
+ */
+ if (__builtin_constant_p(size))
+ return addr > limit - size;
+
+ /* Arbitrary sizes? Be careful about overflow */
+ addr += size;
+ return (addr < size) || (addr > limit);
+}
#define __range_not_ok(addr, size, limit) \
({ \
- unsigned long flag, roksum; \
__chk_user_ptr(addr); \
- asm("add %3,%1 ; sbb %0,%0 ; cmp %1,%4 ; sbb $0,%0" \
- : "=&r" (flag), "=r" (roksum) \
- : "1" (addr), "g" ((long)(size)), \
- "rm" (limit)); \
- flag; \
+ __chk_range_not_ok((unsigned long __force)(addr), size, limit); \
})
/**
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-28 1:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-21 20:27 [RFC] speeding up the stat() family of system calls Linus Torvalds
2013-12-21 22:54 ` John Stoffel
2013-12-22 0:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-12-24 0:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-12-24 0:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-12-24 6:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-12-24 20:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-26 19:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-12-27 0:45 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-12-27 3:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-12-27 6:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-12-27 23:30 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-01-12 17:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-28 1:00 ` tip-bot for Linus Torvalds [this message]
2013-12-28 1:00 ` [tip:x86/asm] x86: Slightly tweak the access_ok() C variant for better code tip-bot for H. Peter Anvin
2013-12-28 1:06 ` tip-bot for H. Peter Anvin
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=tip-c5fe5d80680e2949ffe102180f5fc6cefc0d145f@git.kernel.org \
--to=tipbot@zytor.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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
Powered by JetHome