From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Jade Alglave <j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk>,
Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@inria.fr>,
Daniel Lustig <dlustig@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] tools/memory-model: Remove (dep ; rfi) from ppo
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2019 00:46:05 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ab631777-7cbd-4658-fb99-05d60ec5a1ea@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190226150450.GW32477@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 16:04:50 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 06:28:45AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
>> Yes, this all is a bit on the insane side from a kernel viewpoint.
>> But the paper you found does not impose this; it has instead been there
>> for about 20 years, back before C and C++ admitted to the existence
>> of concurrency. But of course compilers are getting more aggressive,
>> and yes, some of the problems show up in single-threaded code.
>
> But that paper is from last year!! It has Peter Sewell on, I'm sure he's
> heard of concurrency.
>
>> The usual response is "then cast the pointers to intptr_t!" but of
>> course that breaks type checking.
>
> I tried laundering the pointer through intptr_t, but I can't seem to
> unbreak it.
>
>
> root@ivb-ep:~/tmp# gcc-8 -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -o ptr ptr.c ; ./ptr
> p=0x55aacdc80034 q=0x55aacdc80034
> x=1 y=2 *p=11 *q=2
> root@ivb-ep:~/tmp# cat ptr.c
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <string.h>
> #include <stdint.h>
> int y = 2, x = 1;
> int main (int argc, char **argv) {
> intptr_t P = (intptr_t)&x;
> intptr_t Q = (intptr_t)&y;
> P += sizeof(int);
> int *q = &y;
> printf("p=%p q=%p\n", (int*)P, (int*)Q);
> if (P == Q) {
> int *p = (int *)P;
> *p = 11;
> printf("x=%d y=%d *p=%d *q=%d\n", x, y, *p, *q);
> }
> }
>
So, I'm looking at the macro RELOC_HIDE() defined in include/linux/compiler-gcc.h.
It says:
--------
/*
* This macro obfuscates arithmetic on a variable address so that gcc
* shouldn't recognize the original var, and make assumptions about it.
*
* This is needed because the C standard makes it undefined to do
* pointer arithmetic on "objects" outside their boundaries and the
* gcc optimizers assume this is the case. In particular they
* assume such arithmetic does not wrap.
*
[...]
*/
#define RELOC_HIDE(ptr, off) \
({ \
unsigned long __ptr; \
__asm__ ("" : "=r"(__ptr) : "0"(ptr)); \
(typeof(ptr)) (__ptr + (off)); \
})
--------
Looks like this macro has existed ever since the origin of Linus' git repo.
And the optimization "bug" discussed in this thread can be suppressed by
this macro.
For example,
$ gcc -O2 -o reloc_hide reloc_hide.c; ./reloc_hide
x=1 y=11 *p=11 *q=11
$ cat reloc_hide.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#define RELOC_HIDE(ptr, off) \
({ \
uintptr_t __ptr; \
__asm__ ("" : "=r"(__ptr) : "0"(ptr)); \
(typeof(ptr)) (__ptr + (off)); \
})
int y = 2, x = 1;
int main (int argc, char **argv) {
int *p = RELOC_HIDE(&x, sizeof(*p));
int *q = RELOC_HIDE(&y, 0);
if (p == q) {
*p = 11;
printf("x=%d y=%d *p=%d *q=%d\n", x, y, *p, *q);
}
}
Note that "uintptr_t" is used in this version of RELOC_HIDE() for user-land
code.
Am I the only one who was not aware of this gcc-specific macro?
Thanks, Akira
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-06 15:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-19 22:57 [RFC PATCH] tools/memory-model: Remove (dep ; rfi) from ppo Andrea Parri
2019-02-19 22:57 ` Andrea Parri
2019-02-20 2:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-20 2:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-20 9:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-20 9:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-20 9:57 ` Will Deacon
2019-02-20 9:57 ` Will Deacon
2019-02-20 13:17 ` Andrea Parri
2019-02-20 13:17 ` Andrea Parri
2019-02-20 13:14 ` Andrea Parri
2019-02-20 13:14 ` Andrea Parri
2019-02-20 13:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-20 13:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-22 11:21 ` Andrea Parri
2019-02-22 11:21 ` Andrea Parri
2019-02-22 13:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-22 13:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-25 17:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-25 17:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-26 9:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 9:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 9:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 9:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 10:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 10:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 11:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 11:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 11:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 11:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 11:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 11:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 11:38 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-02-26 11:38 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-02-26 13:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 13:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 14:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-26 14:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-26 14:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 14:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 15:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-26 15:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-26 14:56 ` Akira Yokosawa
2019-02-26 14:56 ` Akira Yokosawa
2019-02-26 15:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-26 15:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-26 15:09 ` Akira Yokosawa
2019-02-26 15:09 ` Akira Yokosawa
2019-02-26 15:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-02-26 15:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-06 15:46 ` Akira Yokosawa [this message]
2019-03-06 15:46 ` Akira Yokosawa
2019-03-06 16:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-06 16:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-03-06 17:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-03-06 17:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-03-06 17:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-03-06 17:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-03-02 15:27 ` Akira Yokosawa
2019-03-02 15:27 ` Akira Yokosawa
2019-03-04 16:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-03-04 16:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-02-20 13:41 ` Will Deacon
2019-02-20 13:41 ` Will Deacon
2019-02-20 15:30 ` Alan Stern
2019-02-20 15:30 ` Alan Stern
2019-02-20 15:22 ` Alan Stern
2019-02-20 15:22 ` Alan Stern
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=ab631777-7cbd-4658-fb99-05d60ec5a1ea@gmail.com \
--to=akiyks@gmail.com \
--cc=andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dlustig@nvidia.com \
--cc=j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luc.maranget@inria.fr \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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