From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, kees@kernel.org, ojeda@kernel.org,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
arnd@arndb.de, dan.carpenter@linaro.org,
benjamin.copeland@linaro.org,
Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/pci: Fix FIELD_PREP compilation error with gcc-8
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2025 14:12:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250906141227.6ec8a775@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250828101237.1359212-1-anders.roxell@linaro.org>
On Thu, 28 Aug 2025 12:12:37 +0200
Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> wrote:
> Commit cbc654d18d37 ("bitops: Add __attribute_const__ to generic
> ffs()-family implementations") causes a compilation failure on ARM
> footbridge_defconfig with gcc-8:
>
> FIELD_PREP: value too large for the field
>
> The error occurs in pcie_set_readrq() at:
> v = FIELD_PREP(PCI_EXP_DEVCTL_READRQ, ffs(rq) - 8);
>
> With __attribute_const__, gcc-8 now performs wrong compile-time
> validation in FIELD_PREP and cannot guarantee that ffs(rq) - 8 will
> always produce values that fit in the 3-bit PCI_EXP_DEVCTL_READRQ field.
Which is actually quite correct - in principle pcie_get_mps() could
return a small value.
What is probably happening is that two copies of the FIELD_PREP()
are being generated for ffs(rq) and ffs(mps).
The latter might be (mps ? asm_fun(mps) + 1 : 0) leading to an extra
copy for ffs(0) - which will cause the warning in FIELD_PREP.
An alternate fix you be to move the validation of rq below the
'performance' clamp.
David
>
> Avoid FIELD_PREP entirely by using direct bit manipulation. Replace
> FIELD_PREP(PCI_EXP_DEVCTL_READRQ, ffs(rq) - 8) with the equivalent
> manual bit operations: ((ffs(rq) - 8) << 12) & PCI_EXP_DEVCTL_READRQ.
>
> This bypasses the compile-time validation while maintaining identical
> runtime behavior and functionality.
>
> Fixes: cbc654d18d37 ("bitops: Add __attribute_const__ to generic ffs()-family implementations")
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/CA+G9fYuysVr6qT8bjF6f08WLyCJRG7aXAeSd2F7=zTaHHd7L+Q@mail.gmail.com/T/#u
> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/pci/pci.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> index e698278229f2..9f9607bd9f51 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> @@ -5893,7 +5893,8 @@ int pcie_set_readrq(struct pci_dev *dev, int rq)
> rq = mps;
> }
>
> - v = FIELD_PREP(PCI_EXP_DEVCTL_READRQ, ffs(rq) - 8);
> + /* Ideally we would used FIELD_PREP() but this is a work around for gcc-8 */
> + v = ((ffs(rq) - 8) << 12) & PCI_EXP_DEVCTL_READRQ;
>
> if (bridge->no_inc_mrrs) {
> int max_mrrs = pcie_get_readrq(dev);
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-06 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-28 10:12 [PATCH] drivers/pci: Fix FIELD_PREP compilation error with gcc-8 Anders Roxell
2025-09-04 4:29 ` Kees Cook
2025-09-05 5:31 ` Kees Cook
2025-09-06 13:12 ` David Laight [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=20250906141227.6ec8a775@pumpkin \
--to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=anders.roxell@linaro.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=benjamin.copeland@linaro.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkft@linaro.org \
--cc=ojeda@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