Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 04:51:56 +0000 From: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com> To: Colin Vidal <colin@...dal.org>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com> CC: "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "Anvin, H Peter" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>, David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com> Subject: RE: [RFC v3 PATCH 01/13] Add architecture independent hardened atomic base On Tue, 2016-11-01 at 14:55 +0200, Hans Liljestrand wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 12:15:25PM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi (again :-)) Elena, Hans, > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/atomic.h b/include/linux/atomic.h > > <snip> > > > > > > +#ifndef atomic_cmpxchg_wrap > > > +#define atomic_cmpxchg_wrap(...) \ > > > + __atomic_op_fence(atomic_cmpxchg_wrap, __VA_ARGS__) #endif > > > #endif /* atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed */ > > > > > > > > > > > I have a problem here. With ARMv7 (without any of my patches), I > > > have a implicit declaration of atomic_cmpxchg_wrap. Perhaps > > > something like > > > > > > > > #ifndef atomic_cmpxchg_wrap_relaxed > > > #define atomic_cmpxchg_wrap_relaxed atomic_cmpxchg_wrap > > > > > > > > is missing? I didn't follow the recent changes of that part, so I > > > am not quite sure... > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > Colin > > > > > > > > In file included from ./include/linux/spinlock.h:406:0, > > from ./include/linux/seqlock.h:35, > > from ./include/linux/time.h:5, > > from ./include/linux/stat.h:18, > > from ./include/linux/module.h:10, > > from net/ipv4/route.c:67: > > > > > > net/ipv4/route.c: In function ‘ip_idents_reserve’: > > > ./include/linux/atomic.h:459:20: error: implicit declaration of > > > function ‘atomic_cmpxchg_wrap_relaxed’ > > > [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > __atomic_op_fence(atomic_cmpxchg_wrap, __VA_ARGS__) > > ^ > > > > > > ./include/linux/atomic.h:62:9: note: in definition of macro ‘__atomic_op_fence’ > > > typeof(op##_relaxed(args)) __ret; \ > > ^~ > > > > > > net/ipv4/route.c:488:11: note: in expansion of macro ‘atomic_cmpxchg_wrap’ > > > } while (atomic_cmpxchg_wrap(p_id, old, new) != old); > > > > Oh, I think this is because we don't have atomic_cmpxchg_wrap_relaxed defined neither atomic_xchg_wrap_relaxed. Wonder why this doesn't show up on x86, I did many builds without our x86 changes to verify. > > Hans could you please handle this change today to unblock Colin? > > Could have been this was an error that didn't show up on x86, but not > sure why cmpxchg and xchg wasn't guarded as the other atomic_*_relaxed > functions. This whole section is a bit iffy, the aim is to be > analogous to the non-wrap relaxed functions, but without actually > having relaxed_wrap functions, so basically these probably always just end up defining the _wrap_relaxed as _wrap functions. > > I've committed a possible "fix". But I cannot confirm since I don't > see the error on my build setups. Thank you Hans! > >Yep, seems good here! Thanks! >FYI, I use generic config files generated by > > make ARCH=arm defconfig #for v7 > make ARCH=arm imx_v6_v7_defconfig #for generic atomic64 (v6) We will add this configuration to our build test set to make sure we don't make mistakes here again. Best Regards, Elena.
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.