|
Message-ID: <20171120122235.ku6whdnpgatib6in@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:22:35 +0000 From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] arm64: write __range_ok() in C On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 03:28:19PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:09:41AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > +static bool __range_ok_c(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size) > > +{ > > + unsigned long result; > > + > > + if (__builtin_uaddl_overflow(addr, size, &result)) > > I'm not sure if you're planning to revisit this series, but thought I'd > give you a heads up that apparently GCC 4.x doesn't have support for this > builtin, so we'll need to carry the asm at least for that toolchain. Thanks for the heads-up. I see my Linaro 14.09 GCC 4.9 generates an out-of-line call to a __builtin_uaddl_overflow helper. We can avoid the builtin, and write the test in C instead, e.g. static inline bool __range_ok_c(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size) { unsigned long end = addr + size; if (end < addr) return false; return end <= current_thread_info()->addr_limit; } ... in my standalone test-case, that generates code that's almost identical to the builtin, except that the compiler chooses to look at a different flag. Thanks, Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.