Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Feb 2023 12:12:01 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/5] lib/bitmap: add test for bitmap_{from,to}_arr64 | From | Guenter Roeck <> |
| |
On 2/27/23 11:24, Yury Norov wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 06:59:12AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On 2/27/23 06:46, Alexander Lobakin wrote: >>> From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> >>> Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2023 16:06:45 -0800 >>> >>>> On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 04:05:02PM -0800, Yury Norov wrote: >>>>> On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 10:47:02AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 01:51:14PM -0700, Yury Norov wrote: >>>>>>> Test newly added bitmap_{from,to}_arr64() functions similarly to >>>>>>> already existing bitmap_{from,to}_arr32() tests. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ever since this test is in the tree, several of my boot tests show >>>>>> lots of messages such as >>>>>> >>>>>> test_bitmap: bitmap_to_arr64(nbits == 1): tail is not safely cleared: 0xa5a5a5a500000001 (must be 0x0000000000000001) >>> >>> Hmmm, the whole 4 bytes weren't touched. >>> >>>>>> test_bitmap: bitmap_to_arr64(nbits == 2): tail is not safely cleared: 0xa5a5a5a500000001 (must be 0x0000000000000003) >>>>>> test_bitmap: bitmap_to_arr64(nbits == 3): tail is not safely cleared: 0xa5a5a5a500000001 (must be 0x0000000000000007) >>> >>> This is where it gets worse... >>> >>>>>> ... >>>>>> test_bitmap: bitmap_to_arr64(nbits == 927): tail is not safely cleared: 0xa5a5a5a500000000 (must be 0x000000007fffffff) >>>>>> test_bitmap: bitmap_to_arr64(nbits == 928): tail is not safely cleared: 0xa5a5a5a580000000 (must be 0x00000000ffffffff) >>> >>> I don't see the pattern how the actual result gets generated. But the >>> problem is in the bitmap code rather than in the subtest -- "must be"s >>> are fully correct. >>> >>> Given that the 0xa5s are present in the upper 32 bits, it is Big Endian >>> I guess? Maybe even 32-bit Big Endian? Otherwise I'd start concerning >>> how comes it doesn't reproduce on x86_64s :D >>> >> >> It does reproduce on 32-bit x86 builds, and as far as I can see >> it is only seen with 32-bit little endian systems. > > Hi Guenter, Alexander, > > I think that the reason for the failures like this: > >> test_bitmap: bitmap_to_arr64(nbits == 1): tail is not safely cleared: 0xa5a5a5a500000001 (must be 0x0000000000000001) > > is that bitmap_to_arr64 is overly optimized for 32-bit LE architectures. > > Regarding this: > >> test_bitmap: bitmap_to_arr64(nbits == 927): tail is not safely cleared: 0xa5a5a5a500000000 (must be 0x000000007fffffff) > > I am not sure what happens, but because this again happens on 32-bit > LE only, I hope the following fix would help too. > > Can you please check if the patch works for you? I don't have a 32-bit LE > machine in hand, and all my 32-bit VMs (arm and i386) refuse to load the > latest kernels for some weird reason, so it's only build-tested. > > I'll give it a full-run when restore my 32-bit setups. > > Thanks, > Yury > >>From 2881714db497aed103e310865da075e7b0ce7e1a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 09:21:59 -0800 > Subject: [PATCH] lib/bitmap: drop optimization of bitmap_{from,to}_arr64 > > bitmap_{from,to}_arr64() optimization is overly optimistic on 32-bit LE > architectures when it's wired to bitmap_copy_clear_tail(). > > bitmap_copy_clear_tail() takes care of unused bits in the bitmap up to > the next word boundary. But on 32-bit machines when copying bits from > bitmap to array of 64-bit words, it's expected that the unused part of > a recipient array must be cleared up to 64-bit boundary, so the last 4 > bytes may stay untouched. > > While the copying part of the optimization works correct, that clear-tail > trick makes corresponding tests reasonably fail when nbits % 64 <= 32: > > test_bitmap: bitmap_to_arr64(nbits == 1): tail is not safely cleared: 0xa5a5a5a500000001 (must be 0x0000000000000001) > > Fix it by removing bitmap_{from,to}_arr64() optimization for 32-bit LE > arches. > > Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> > Fixes: 0a97953fd2210 ("lib: add bitmap_{from,to}_arr64") > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
Tested with 32-bit i386 image. With this patch on top of v6.2-12765-g982818426a0f, the log messages are gone. Without this patch, they are still seen.
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Guenter
> --- > include/linux/bitmap.h | 8 +++----- > lib/bitmap.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/bitmap.h b/include/linux/bitmap.h > index 40e53a2ecc0d..5abc993903fb 100644 > --- a/include/linux/bitmap.h > +++ b/include/linux/bitmap.h > @@ -302,12 +302,10 @@ void bitmap_to_arr32(u32 *buf, const unsigned long *bitmap, > #endif > > /* > - * On 64-bit systems bitmaps are represented as u64 arrays internally. On LE32 > - * machines the order of hi and lo parts of numbers match the bitmap structure. > - * In both cases conversion is not needed when copying data from/to arrays of > - * u64. > + * On 64-bit systems bitmaps are represented as u64 arrays internally. So, > + * conversion is not needed when copying data from/to arrays of u64. > */ > -#if (BITS_PER_LONG == 32) && defined(__BIG_ENDIAN) > +#if BITS_PER_LONG == 32 > void bitmap_from_arr64(unsigned long *bitmap, const u64 *buf, unsigned int nbits); > void bitmap_to_arr64(u64 *buf, const unsigned long *bitmap, unsigned int nbits); > #else > diff --git a/lib/bitmap.c b/lib/bitmap.c > index 1c81413c51f8..ddb31015e38a 100644 > --- a/lib/bitmap.c > +++ b/lib/bitmap.c > @@ -1495,7 +1495,7 @@ void bitmap_to_arr32(u32 *buf, const unsigned long *bitmap, unsigned int nbits) > EXPORT_SYMBOL(bitmap_to_arr32); > #endif > > -#if (BITS_PER_LONG == 32) && defined(__BIG_ENDIAN) > +#if BITS_PER_LONG == 32 > /** > * bitmap_from_arr64 - copy the contents of u64 array of bits to bitmap > * @bitmap: array of unsigned longs, the destination bitmap
| |