From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk (pandora.armlinux.org.uk [78.32.30.218]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96F232F32 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2025 19:11:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=78.32.30.218 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745435498; cv=none; b=WE5LWKjctxW5IXY0MR0k9lCA2MdClE89xvBlNHQk7SdNrB6MP/m6tOTst3DQv4uglWdWJUSN9Tiz3Tjzo5Z58WgSFvgCNDcSOQiCG9m4Ox8JyXjC4//Tp/wWv8+WUxAM0h1RgBrhWq0Km7I71fNgFzT1HevKZDxnf88FJIefrNs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745435498; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1A9Kpn5gWDgTPpGdW+Bqy4gqqJlhVZpY4wvKxWo1xec=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=A1EVHWFIq1kB6hk1VTo98JxTCSaHkfn4jeoEWGyiq9e0xigDfyDQNbca4fFEAYYL9MtgFYW9p4kV6PV67BzYt1AB9R+6hSIe6RaOdPer+nXElMQyu7rEkAJ5A4R9IhbEyYzCugpe4BwdFcN6behVDZlyXiUMlyo7GG/lR9IEbNM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=armlinux.org.uk; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=armlinux.org.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=armlinux.org.uk header.i=@armlinux.org.uk header.b=gR+JBAJ2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=78.32.30.218 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=armlinux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=armlinux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=armlinux.org.uk header.i=@armlinux.org.uk header.b="gR+JBAJ2" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armlinux.org.uk; s=pandora-2019; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ehGug8WvDyCD5M5pIZOyKV928YDmAC5y0+gfYQ09jXs=; b=gR+JBAJ2qYXt394sKZwRWQbCpN HcCePrKHfFGuCBW/CVsEGeyPPPBU/OQFtTsArQ9YAQMdfrPO91pRpinnkaU+R3jp+UdCphKe75jFH ucyYXyXAR2foVu/mfhe3HwUcFVAYNSC0D2IF/239fM2PkQuMT0/jZ9Eup36+0LE43cVft0e9OZxx5 dDTM3b1WXjpuJEb+/LCJQPWrlgDi1mUkEElwET/A/fla7O5FXGgwS0k0+1m++lZoElXyOp6z21cIM PjsApZ3zXuvkQ0rQfUsItb9D7TVFm1pADJUTTToBoUfafozF64nMdonx3qfC29IHEpO7FhUsX84Zq V3eCi9ZA==; Received: from shell.armlinux.org.uk ([fd8f:7570:feb6:1:5054:ff:fe00:4ec]:52066) by pandora.armlinux.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1u7fVE-0006RY-0p; Wed, 23 Apr 2025 20:11:24 +0100 Received: from linux by shell.armlinux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1u7fV8-0000JD-0y; Wed, 23 Apr 2025 20:11:18 +0100 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 20:11:18 +0100 From: "Russell King (Oracle)" To: Yury Norov Cc: Marc Zyngier , Luo Jie , Rasmus Villemoes , Julia Lawall , Nicolas Palix , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Oliver Upton , Joey Gouly , Suzuki K Poulose , Zenghui Yu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cocci@inria.fr, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, andrew@lunn.ch, quic_kkumarcs@quicinc.com, quic_linchen@quicinc.com, quic_leiwei@quicinc.com, quic_suruchia@quicinc.com, quic_pavir@quicinc.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] arm64: nvhe: Convert the opencoded field modify Message-ID: References: <20250417-field_modify-v3-0-6f7992aafcb7@quicinc.com> <20250417-field_modify-v3-4-6f7992aafcb7@quicinc.com> <86r01rjald.wl-maz@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: Russell King (Oracle) On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 02:27:06PM -0400, Yury Norov wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 06:48:34PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 11:14:48AM -0400, Yury Norov wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 12:23:10PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > > On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 11:47:11 +0100, > > > > Luo Jie wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Replaced below code with the wrapper FIELD_MODIFY(MASK, ®, val) > > > > > - reg &= ~MASK; > > > > > - reg |= FIELD_PREP(MASK, val); > > > > > The semantic patch that makes this change is available > > > > > in scripts/coccinelle/misc/field_modify.cocci. > > > > > > > > > > More information about semantic patching is available at > > > > > https://coccinelle.gitlabpages.inria.fr/website > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Luo Jie > > > > > --- > > > > > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/memory.h | 3 +-- > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/memory.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/memory.h > > > > > index 34233d586060..b2af748964d0 100644 > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/memory.h > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/memory.h > > > > > @@ -30,8 +30,7 @@ enum pkvm_page_state { > > > > > static inline enum kvm_pgtable_prot pkvm_mkstate(enum kvm_pgtable_prot prot, > > > > > enum pkvm_page_state state) > > > > > { > > > > > - prot &= ~PKVM_PAGE_STATE_PROT_MASK; > > > > > - prot |= FIELD_PREP(PKVM_PAGE_STATE_PROT_MASK, state); > > > > > + FIELD_MODIFY(PKVM_PAGE_STATE_PROT_MASK, &prot, state); > > > > > return prot; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > Following up on my suggestion to *not* add anything new, this patch > > > > could be written as: > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/memory.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/memory.h > > > > index 34233d5860607..08cb6ba0e0716 100644 > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/memory.h > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/nvhe/memory.h > > > > @@ -30,9 +30,8 @@ enum pkvm_page_state { > > > > static inline enum kvm_pgtable_prot pkvm_mkstate(enum kvm_pgtable_prot prot, > > > > enum pkvm_page_state state) > > > > { > > > > - prot &= ~PKVM_PAGE_STATE_PROT_MASK; > > > > - prot |= FIELD_PREP(PKVM_PAGE_STATE_PROT_MASK, state); > > > > - return prot; > > > > + u64 p = prot; > > > > + return u64_replace_bits(p, state, PKVM_PAGE_STATE_PROT_MASK); > > > > } > > > > > > This is a great example where u64_replace_bit() should NOT be used. > > > > Why not? Explain it. Don't leave people in the dark, because right > > now it looks like it's purely a religous fanaticism about what > > should and should not be used. Where's the technical reasoning? > > Because enum is an integer, i.e. 32-bit type. This statement is false, in this case. The kernel currently uses -std=gnu11, and GNU tends to be more relaxed about things, and while the C standard may say that enums are ints, that isn't the case - gcc appears to follow C++ and allow enums that are wider than ints. $ aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc -S -o - -std=gnu99 -x c - enum foo { A = 1L << 0, B = 1L << 53, }; int main() { return sizeof(enum foo); } Gives the following code: main: .LFB0: .cfi_startproc mov w0, 8 ret .cfi_endproc meaning that sizeof(enum foo) is 8 or 64-bit. If B were 1L << 31, then sizeof(enum foo) is 4. > Now, the snippet above > typecasts it to 64-bit fixed size type, passes to 64-bit fixed-type > function, and the returned value is typecasted back to 32-bit int. In this case, the enum is defined using: KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_X = BIT(0), KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_W = BIT(1), KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_R = BIT(2), KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_DEVICE = BIT(3), KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_NORMAL_NC = BIT(4), KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_SW0 = BIT(55), KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_SW1 = BIT(56), KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_SW2 = BIT(57), KVM_PGTABLE_PROT_SW3 = BIT(58), As it contains bits beyond bit 31, and we use -std=gnu11 when building the kernel, this enum is represented using a 64-bit integer type. So, the casting to a u64 is not increasing the size of the enum, and the return value is not getting truncated down to 32-bits. > Doesn't sound the most efficient solution, right? On 32-bit arch it > may double the function size, I guess. Given that there's no inefficiency here, and that this is arm64 code which is a 64-bit arch, both those points you mention seem to be incorrect or not relevant. > But the most important is that if we adopt this practice and spread it > around, it will be really easy to overflow the 32-bit storage. The > compiler will keep silence about that. Given that in Marc's suggestion, "prot" is a 64-bit value, it's being assigned to a u64, which is then being operated on by the u64 variant of _replace_bits(), which returns the u64 result, which then gets returned as a 64-bit enum, there is no issue here as far as I can see. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!