Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1592829

Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy

Show all headers | View raw

On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 1:50 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> wrote:
>
> gcc can't possibly know on what targets is that kernel going to be
> booted on. So it probably does some universally optimal things, like in
> the dmi_scan_machine() case:
>
>         memcpy_fromio(buf, p, 32);
>
> turns into:
>
>         .loc 3 219 0
>         movl    $8, %ecx        #, tmp79
>         movq    %rax, %rsi      # p, p
>         movq    %rsp, %rdi      #, tmp77
>         rep movsl
>
> Apparently it thinks it is fine to do 8*4-byte MOVS. But why not
> 4*8-byte MOVS?

Actually, the "fromio/toio" code should never use regular memcpy().
There used to be devices that literally broke on 64-bit accesses due
to broken PCI crud.

We seem to have broken this *really* long ago, though. On x86-64 we
used to have a special __inline_memcpy() that copies our historical
32-bit thing, and was used for memcpy_fromio() and memcpy_toio(). That
was then undone by commit 6175ddf06b61 ("x86: Clean up mem*io
functions")

That commit says

   "Iomem has no special significance on x86"

but that's not strictly true. iomem is in the same address space and
uses the same access instructions as regular memory, but iomem _is_
special.

And I think it's a bug that we use "memcpy()" on it. Not because of
any gcc issues, but simply because our own memcpy() optimizations are
not appropriate for iomem.

For example, "rep movsb" really is the right thing to use on normal
memory on modern CPU's.

But it is *not* the right thing to use on IO memory, because the CPU
only does the magic cacheline access optimizations on cacheable
memory!

So I think we should re-introduce that old "__inline_memcpy()" as that
special "safe memcpy" thing. Not just for KMEMCHECK, and not just for
64-bit.

Hmm?

                   Linus

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com> - 2017-03-04 22:20 +0100
  Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-04 23:50 +0100
    Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy hpa@zytor.com - 2017-03-05 01:00 +0100
      Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-05 01:20 +0100
        Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy hpa@zytor.com - 2017-03-05 01:30 +0100
          Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-05 01:40 +0100
            Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy hpa@zytor.com - 2017-03-05 02:00 +0100
              Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-05 11:00 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-05 12:20 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-05 14:10 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-05 20:30 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-05 21:20 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-03-05 21:20 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com> - 2017-03-06 08:10 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> - 2017-03-06 08:40 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com> - 2017-03-06 18:50 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy hpa@zytor.com - 2017-03-06 20:10 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-06 14:40 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy hpa@zytor.com - 2017-03-06 14:50 +0100
                Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-06 15:10 +0100
            Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com> - 2017-03-05 06:00 +0100
              Re: Question Regarding ERMS memcpy Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> - 2017-03-05 11:00 +0100

csiph-web