Modify bitmap_set_value() to suppress compiler warning
Subsystems (6)
v2 cover Modify bitmap_set_value() to suppress compiler warning
Hi All,
The purpose of this patchset is to suppress the compiler warning (-Wtype-limits).
In function bitmap_set_value(), add explicit check to see if the value being written into the bitmap does not fall outside the bitmap.
The situation that it is falling outside is never possible in the code because the boundaries are required to be correct before the function is called. The responsibility is on the caller for ensuring the boundaries are correct.
The code change is simply to silence the GCC warning messages because GCC is not aware that the boundaries have already been checked. As such, we're better off using __builtin_unreachable() here because we can avoid the latency of the conditional check entirely.
Michal,
What do you think of [PATCH 2/2]? Is the conditional check needed, and also does returning -EINVAL look good?
Changes in v2:
- [Patch 1/2]: Squashed earlier three patches into one.
Syed Nayyar Waris (2):
bitmap: Modify bitmap_set_value() to check bitmap length
gpio: xilinx: Add extra check if sum of widths exceed 64
drivers/gpio/gpio-xilinx.c | 18 ++++++++++++------ include/linux/bitmap.h | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------- lib/test_bitmap.c | 4 ++-- 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
base-commit: b640c4e12bbe1f0b6383c3ef788a89e5427c763f
Signature · 7 lines
2.29.0 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
PATCH v2 1/2 bitmap: Modify bitmap_set_value() to check bitmap length
Add explicit check to see if the value being written into the bitmap does not fall outside the bitmap.
The situation that it is falling outside would never be possible in the code because the boundaries are required to be correct before the function is called. The responsibility is on the caller for ensuring the boundaries are correct.
The code change is simply to silence the GCC warning messages because GCC is not aware that the boundaries have already been checked. As such, we're better off using __builtin_unreachable() here because we can avoid the latency of the conditional check entirely.
lib/test_bitmap.c: Modify for_each_set_clump test
Modify the test where bitmap_set_value() is called. bitmap_set_value() now takes an extra bitmap-width as second argument and the width of value is now present as the fourth argument.
gpio: xilinx: Modify bitmap_set_value() calls
Modify the bitmap_set_value() calls. bitmap_set_value() now takes an extra bitmap width as second argument and the width of value is now present as the fourth argument.
--- drivers/gpio/gpio-xilinx.c | 12 ++++++------ include/linux/bitmap.h | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------- lib/test_bitmap.c | 4 ++-- 3 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
drivers/gpio/gpio-xilinx.c +6 -6
@@ -151,16 +151,16 @@ static void xgpio_set_multiple(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned long *mask,spin_lock_irqsave (&chip->gpio_lock[0 ], flags);spin_lock (&chip->gpio_lock[1 ]); -bitmap_set_value (old, state[0 ],0 , width[0 ]); -bitmap_set_value (old, state[1 ], width[0 ], width[1 ]); +bitmap_set_value (old,64 , state[0 ], width[0 ],0 ); +bitmap_set_value (old,64 , state[1 ], width[1 ], width[0 ]);bitmap_replace (new, old, bits, mask, gc->ngpio); -bitmap_set_value (old, state[0 ],0 ,32 ); -bitmap_set_value (old, state[1 ],32 ,32 ); +bitmap_set_value (old,64 , state[0 ],32 ,0 ); +bitmap_set_value (old,64 , state[1 ],32 ,32 ); state[0 ] =bitmap_get_value (new,0 , width[0 ]); state[1 ] =bitmap_get_value (new, width[0 ], width[1 ]); -bitmap_set_value (new, state[0 ],0 ,32 ); -bitmap_set_value (new, state[1 ],32 ,32 ); +bitmap_set_value (new,64 , state[0 ],32 ,0 ); +bitmap_set_value (new,64 , state[1 ],32 ,32 );bitmap_xor (changed, old, new,64 );if (((u32 *)changed)[0 ])
include/linux/bitmap.h +21 -14
@@ -78,8 +78,9 @@* bitmap_get_value(map, start, nbits) Get bit value of size * 'nbits' from map at start * bitmap_set_value8(map, value, start) Set 8bit value to map at start -* bitmap_set_value(map, value, start, nbits) Set bit value of size 'nbits' -* of map at start +* bitmap_set_value(map, nbits, value, value_width, start) +* Set bit value of size value_width +* to map at start * * Note, bitmap_zero() and bitmap_fill() operate over the region of * unsigned longs, that is, bits behind bitmap till the unsigned long
@@ -610,30 +611,36 @@ static inline void bitmap_set_value8(unsigned long *map, unsigned long value, }/** -* bitmap_set_value - set n-bit value within a memory region +* bitmap_set_value - set value within a memory region * @map: address to the bitmap memory region -* @value: value of nbits -* @start: bit offset of the n-bit value -* @nbits: size of value in bits (must be between 1 and BITS_PER_LONG inclusive). +* @nbits: size of map in bits +* @value: value of clump +* @value_width: size of value in bits (must be between 1 and BITS_PER_LONG inclusive) +* @start: bit offset of the value */ -static inline void bitmap_set_value (unsigned long *map, -unsigned long value, -unsigned long start,unsigned long nbits) +static inline void bitmap_set_value (unsigned long *map,unsigned long nbits, +unsigned long value,unsigned long value_width, +unsigned long start) { -const size_t index =BIT_WORD (start); +const unsigned long index =BIT_WORD (start); +const unsigned long length =BIT_WORD (nbits);const unsigned long offset = start %BITS_PER_LONG ;const unsigned long ceiling =round_up (start +1 ,BITS_PER_LONG );const unsigned long space = ceiling - start; - value &=GENMASK (nbits -1 ,0 ); + value &=GENMASK (value_width -1 ,0 ); -if (space >= nbits) { - map[index] &= ~(GENMASK (nbits -1 ,0 ) << offset); +if (space >= value_width) { + map[index] &= ~(GENMASK (value_width -1 ,0 ) << offset); map[index] |= value << offset; }else { map[index +0 ] &= ~BITMAP_FIRST_WORD_MASK (start); map[index +0 ] |= value << offset; - map[index +1 ] &= ~BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK (start + nbits); + +if (index +1 >= length) +__builtin_unreachable (); + + map[index +1 ] &= ~BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK (start + value_width); map[index +1 ] |= value >> space; } }
lib/test_bitmap.c +2 -2
@@ -656,8 +656,8 @@ static void __init prepare_test_data(unsigned int index)unsigned long width =0 ;for (i =0 ; i < clump_test_data[index].count; i++) { -bitmap_set_value (clump_test_data[index].data, - clump_bitmap_data[(clump_test_data[index].offset)++], width,32 ); +bitmap_set_value (clump_test_data[index].data,256 , + clump_bitmap_data[(clump_test_data[index].offset)++],32 , width); width +=32 ; } }
Signature · 7 lines
2.29.0 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
kernel test robot
build botRe: [PATCH v2 1/2] bitmap: Modify bitmap_set_value() to check bitmap length
I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
Hi Syed,
I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
[auto build test WARNING on b640c4e12bbe1f0b6383c3ef788a89e5427c763f]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Syed-Nayyar-Waris/Modify-bitmap_set_value-to-suppress-compiler-warning/20201212-180653 base: b640c4e12bbe1f0b6383c3ef788a89e5427c763f config: x86_64-allyesconfig (attached as .config) compiler: gcc-9 (Debian 9.3.0-15) 9.3.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/2e22a418a9bc47b3ad67dcd531a7d46192c1f4d4 git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux git fetch --no-tags linux-review Syed-Nayyar-Waris/Modify-bitmap_set_value-to-suppress-compiler-warning/20201212-180653 git checkout 2e22a418a9bc47b3ad67dcd531a7d46192c1f4d4 # save the attached .config to linux build tree make W=1 ARCH=x86_64
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>> drivers/gpio/gpio-xilinx.o: warning: objtool: .text.unlikely: unexpected end of section
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all(a)lists.01.org
kernel test robot
build botRe: [PATCH v2 1/2] bitmap: Modify bitmap_set_value() to check bitmap length
In reply to Syed Nayyar WarisI love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
Hi Syed,
I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
[auto build test WARNING on b640c4e12bbe1f0b6383c3ef788a89e5427c763f]
url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Syed-Nayyar-Waris/Modify-bitmap_set_value-to-suppress-compiler-warning/20201212-180653 base: b640c4e12bbe1f0b6383c3ef788a89e5427c763f config: x86_64-randconfig-a016-20201209 (attached as .config) compiler: gcc-9 (Debian 9.3.0-15) 9.3.0 reproduce (this is a W=1 build): # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/2e22a418a9bc47b3ad67dcd531a7d46192c1f4d4 git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux git fetch --no-tags linux-review Syed-Nayyar-Waris/Modify-bitmap_set_value-to-suppress-compiler-warning/20201212-180653 git checkout 2e22a418a9bc47b3ad67dcd531a7d46192c1f4d4 # save the attached .config to linux build tree make W=1 ARCH=x86_64
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>> drivers/gpio/gpio-xilinx.o: warning: objtool: bitmap_set_value.constprop.0() falls through to next function xgpio_set_multiple()
---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all(a)lists.01.org
Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] bitmap: Modify bitmap_set_value() to check bitmap length
In reply to Syed Nayyar WarisQuoted 24 lines · Syed Nayyar Waris
Add explicit check to see if the value being written into the bitmap does not fall outside the bitmap.
The situation that it is falling outside would never be possible in the code because the boundaries are required to be correct before the function is called. The responsibility is on the caller for ensuring the boundaries are correct.
The code change is simply to silence the GCC warning messages because GCC is not aware that the boundaries have already been checked. As such, we're better off using__builtin_unreachable()here because we can avoid the latency of the conditional check entirely.Cc Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Syed Nayyar Waris <[email protected]>
lib/test_bitmap.c: Modifyfor_each_set_clumptestModify the test where
bitmap_set_value()is called.bitmap_set_value()now takes an extra bitmap-width as second argument and the width of value is now present as the fourth argument.Signed-off-by Syed Nayyar Waris <[email protected]>
Quoted 8 lines
gpio: xilinx: Modify
bitmap_set_value()callsModify the
bitmap_set_value()calls.bitmap_set_value()now takes an extra bitmap width as second argument and the width of value is now present as the fourth argument.Cc Michal Simek <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Syed Nayyar Waris <[email protected]>
Commit message here definitely needs more work.
First of all, it's now quite awkward to see this squashed stuff like this. Second, it misses the warning examples it's talking about. Third, it repeats some tags.
Fourth, it misses the Fixes tag.
Please, redone it correctly (one commit message with clear purpose and example of warnings followed by Fixes tag) and resend a v3.
You may mention in the cover letter that this is squashed of three patches from v1 (and give a link to lore.kernel.org).
Signature · 2 lines
With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
PATCH v2 2/2 gpio: xilinx: Add extra check if sum of widths exceed 64
In reply to Syed Nayyar WarisAdd extra check to see if sum of widths does not exceed 64. If it exceeds then return -EINVAL alongwith appropriate error message.
--- drivers/gpio/gpio-xilinx.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
drivers/gpio/gpio-xilinx.c +6 -0
@@ -340,6 +340,12 @@ static int xgpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) chip->gc.base =-1 ; chip->gc.ngpio = chip->gpio_width[0 ] + chip->gpio_width[1 ]; + +if (chip->gc.ngpio >64 ) { +dev_err (&pdev->dev,"invalid configuration: number of GPIO is greater than 64" ); +return -EINVAL ; + } + chip->gc.parent = &pdev->dev; chip->gc.direction_input = xgpio_dir_in; chip->gc.direction_output = xgpio_dir_out;
Signature · 7 lines
2.29.0 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel