public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Ian Molton <spyro@f2s.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: A question about PROT_NONE on ARM and ARM26
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 00:30:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040630233014.GC32560@mail.shareable.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040630235921.C1496@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>

Russell King wrote:
> > Here's the potential improvement to current 32-bit ARM.  It's
> > 4 instructions instead of 8 and one less load, in the common case:
> > 
> > __get_user_4:
> > 	cmp	r0, #TASK_SIZE-4
> > 4:	ldrlet	r1, [r0]
> > 	movle	r0, #0
> > 	movle	pc, lr
> > 	bic	r1, sp, #0x1f00
> > 	bic	r1, r1, #0x00ff
> > 	ldr	r1, [r1, #TI_ADDR_LIMIT]
> > 	sub	r1, r1, #4
> > 	cmp	r0, r1
> > 14:	ldrlet	r1, [r0]
> > 	movle	r0, #0
> > 	movle	pc, lr
> > 	b	__get_user_bad
> 
> Ok, this could work, but there's one gotcha - TASK_SIZE-4 doesn't fit
> in an 8-bit rotated constants, so we need 2 extra instructions:
> 
> __get_user_4:
> 	mov	r1, #TASK_SIZE
> 	sub	r1, r1, #4
> 	cmp	r0, r1
> 4:	ldrlet	r1, [r0]
> 	movle	r0, #0
> 	movle	pc, lr
> 	...

One more possibility:

	cmp	r0, #(TASK_SIZE - (1<<24))

I.e. just compare against the largest constant that can be
represented.  For accesses to the last part of userspace, it's a
penalty of 4 instructions -- but it might work out to be a net gain.

Actually, since the shortest path is only three instructions in the
fast case, not counting control flow, it might be good to inline those
3 in uaccess.h, and change the "bl" to a conditonal "blhi" there.

> > Finally, I think I see a bug in current ARM.  Shouldn't this use
> > ldrlet instead of ldrlst?  Think about accesses to addresses
> > TASK_SIZE-4 and 0xfffffffc.
> 
> LS = unsigned less than or same.  LE = signed less than or equal.  You
> need the unsigned compare because addresses are unsigned.

Ah.  I was guessing the mnemonic.

That's because of the way "ge" is used on ARM26 in places, which
therefore look buggy or subtly clever:

        ldr     r1, [r1, #TI_ADDR_LIMIT]
        sub     r1, r1, #4
        cmp     r0, r1
        bge     __get_user_bad
        cmp     r0, #0x02000000
4:      ldrlst  r1, [r0]
        ldrge   r1, [r0]

"ge" is a signed comparison, and unsigned is needed here, unless I
missed something subtle.  So "bge" and "ldrge" should be "bhi" and "ldrhi".

Thanks,
-- Jamie

  reply	other threads:[~2004-06-30 23:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-06-30  2:44 A question about PROT_NONE on ARM and ARM26 Jamie Lokier
2004-06-30  3:38 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-07-01  3:26   ` Testing PROT_NONE and other protections, and a surprise Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01  3:35     ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-07-01  4:01       ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01  3:44     ` Kyle Moffett
2004-07-01  4:11       ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01  4:59         ` Kyle Moffett
2004-07-01 12:39           ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01 14:43             ` [OT] " Kyle Moffett
2004-07-01 14:50               ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01 15:01                 ` Kyle Moffett
2004-07-01 16:37                   ` Matt Mackall
2004-07-01 17:26               ` Michael Driscoll
2004-07-02  7:37               ` Gabriel Paubert
2004-07-01 12:52     ` Russell King
2004-07-01 14:26     ` Richard Curnow
2004-06-30  8:16 ` A question about PROT_NONE on ARM and ARM26 Russell King
2004-06-30 14:59   ` Jamie Lokier
2004-06-30 15:22     ` Ian Molton
2004-06-30 18:26     ` Russell King
2004-06-30 19:14       ` Jamie Lokier
2004-06-30 19:23         ` Russell King
2004-06-30 20:15           ` Jamie Lokier
2004-06-30 22:59             ` Russell King
2004-06-30 23:30               ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2004-06-30 23:48                 ` Ian Molton
2004-07-01  1:59                   ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-01  1:05                 ` Nicolas Pitre
2004-07-01  1:50                   ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-02 18:39                 ` Russell King
2004-07-01 15:27               ` Scott Wood
2004-07-01 23:53                 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-07-02 14:36                   ` Scott Wood

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=20040630233014.GC32560@mail.shareable.org \
    --to=jamie@shareable.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=spyro@f2s.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