From: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Doug Thompson <dougthompson@xmission.com>,
akpm <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bitops.h: Widen BIT macro to support 64-bit types
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 17:36:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101014153633.GA4261@kryptos.osrc.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=ZjR3bWtZ2x9wRzpzBb1K8Wst3Xg_K4mGX-b6o@mail.gmail.com>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 08:03:17AM -0700
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, so BIT() should be fixed to work with the largest type available,
> >> IMHO. Let me cook up something.
> >
> > Maybe something like the following. Build-tested with the crosstool
> > (http://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool) on the following arches:
> > alpha blackfin cris hppa64 ia64 mips64 sparc.
> >
> > Any objections?
>
> Yeah. I object. I have no idea what this will change for everything
> else that expects bitops to work on unsigned long values.
>
> I really think that the bug is not in the BIT() definition, but in the
> use. If somebody wants a non-unsigned-long bit field, they had better
> not use bitops.h.
>
> And no, just changing the BIT() macro to return a 64-bit value is
> _not_ trivially safe. Due to C type rules, now all arithmetic using
> BIT() will suddenly be 64-bit, which is often *much* slower, and can
> introduce real bugs.
>
> On many architectures, a 64-bit non-constant shift will even end up
> being a function call. And if the thing is used in a varargs function,
> the argument layout will be totally different. We've also had several
> issues with 64-bit types and switch() statements, for example. And a
> quick grep for '\<BIT(' shows that non-constant cases are not unheard
> of, and there's a lot of random use where it is not at all obvious
> that it's safe (because it's used for defining other defines).
Concerning safety, I actually had a version which did check the bit
number supplied as an arg for overflowing but this failed when using
BIT() in struct initializers:
.struct_member = { BIT(bla) }
But thanks for the detailed explanation! This makes perfect sense; it
was too much wishful thinking on my part to assume that a ULL BIT()
would be fine after checking that all arches support the unsigned 64-bit
type.
I'm much better off with a local BIT_64() or similar, definition.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
General Managers: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd
Registration: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-14 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-13 20:10 [PATCH -next] edac/mce_amd: fix shift warning Randy Dunlap
2010-10-13 22:39 ` Doug Thompson
2010-10-14 4:24 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-10-14 10:58 ` [PATCH] bitops.h: Widen BIT macro to support 64-bit types Borislav Petkov
2010-10-14 11:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-10-14 12:12 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-10-14 14:27 ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-10-14 15:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-14 15:36 ` Borislav Petkov [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=20101014153633.GA4261@kryptos.osrc.amd.com \
--to=bp@amd64.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dougthompson@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--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 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.