Re: [PATCH] x86: Alias memset to __builtin_memset.

[Nick Desaulniers]

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 7:06 AM Clement Courbet <courbet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments. Answers below.
>
> > This ifdef is unnecessary
> > This needs to be within #ifndef CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE
>
> Thanks, fixed.
>
> > shouldn't this just be done universally ?
>
> It looks like every architecture does its own magic with memory
> functions. I'm not very familiar with how the linux kernel is
> organized, do you have a pointer for where this would go if enabled
> globally ?
>
> > Who's adding it for 64b?
> > Any idea where it's coming from in your
> > build? Maybe a local modification to be removed?
>
> Actually this is from our local build configuration. Apparently this

Not sure we should modify this for someone's downstream tree to work
around an issue they introduced.  If you want to file a bug
internally, I'd be happy to comment on it.

Does __builtin_memset detect support for `rep stosb`, then patch the
kernel to always use it or not?  The kernel is limited in that we use
-mno-sse and friends to avoid saving/restoring vector registers on
context switch unless kernel_fpu_{begin|end}() is called, which the
compiler doesn't insert for memcpy's.

Did you verify what this change does for other compilers?

> is needed to build on some architectures that redefine common
> symbols, but the authors seemed to feel strongly that this should be

Sounds like a linkage error or issue with symbol visibility; I don't
see how -ffreestanding should have any bearing on that.

> on for all architectures. I've reached out to the authors for an
> extended rationale.
> On the other hand I think that there is no reason to prevent people
> from building with freestanding if we can easily allow them to.

I disagree.  The codegen in the kernel is very tricky to get right;
it's somewhat an embedded system, yet provides many symbols that would
have been provided by libc, yet it doesn't use vector operations for
the general case.  Adding -ffreestanding to optimize one hot memset in
one function is using a really big hammer to solve the wrong problem.
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers