Messages in this thread | | | From | Geert Uytterhoeven <> | Date | Mon, 14 May 2018 14:48:08 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: Fix return type of __DIVIDE() when called with 32-bit |
| |
Hi Boris,
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 2:13 PM, Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> wrote: > On Mon, 14 May 2018 14:00:19 +0200 > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: >> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Boris Brezillon >> <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> wrote: >> > On Mon, 14 May 2018 13:32:30 +0200 >> > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 1:23 PM, Boris Brezillon >> >> <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, 14 May 2018 12:49:37 +0200 >> >> > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: >> >> >> The __DIVIDE() macro checks whether it is called with a 32-bit or 64-bit >> >> >> dividend, to select the appropriate divide-and-round-up routine. >> >> >> As the check uses the ternary operator, the result will always be >> >> >> promoted to a type that can hold both results, i.e. unsigned long long. >> >> >> >> >> >> When using this result in a division on a 32-bit system, this may lead >> >> >> to link errors like: >> >> >> >> >> >> ERROR: "__udivdi3" [drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand.ko] undefined! >> >> >> >> >> >> Fix this by casting the result of the 64-bit division to the type of the >> >> >> dividend. >> >> >> >> >> >> Fixes: 8878b126df769831 ("mtd: nand: add ->exec_op() implementation") >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> >> >> >> --- >> >> >> This fixes the root cause of the link failure seen with >> >> >> m68k/allmodconfig since commit 3057fcef385348fe ("mtd: rawnand: Make >> >> >> sure we wait tWB before polling the STATUS reg"). >> >> >> >> >> >> An alternative mitigation was posted as "[PATCH] m68k: Implement >> >> >> ndelay() as an inline function to force type checking/casting" >> >> >> (https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/13/102). >> >> >> --- >> >> >> include/linux/mtd/rawnand.h | 2 +- >> >> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> >> >> >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/mtd/rawnand.h b/include/linux/mtd/rawnand.h >> >> >> index 5dad59b312440a9c..d06dc428ea0102ae 100644 >> >> >> --- a/include/linux/mtd/rawnand.h >> >> >> +++ b/include/linux/mtd/rawnand.h >> >> >> @@ -871,7 +871,7 @@ struct nand_op_instr { >> >> >> #define __DIVIDE(dividend, divisor) ({ \ >> >> >> sizeof(dividend) == sizeof(u32) ? \ >> >> >> DIV_ROUND_UP(dividend, divisor) : \ >> >> >> - DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(dividend, divisor); \ >> >> >> + (__typeof__(dividend))DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(dividend, divisor); \ >> >> > >> >> > Hm, it's a bit hard to follow when you place the cast here. One could >> >> > wonder why a cast to (__typeof__(dividend)) is needed since >> >> > DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL() already returns a (__typeof__(dividend)) type. >> >> >> >> DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL() does not return __typeof__(dividend), but >> >> unsigned long long. >> > >> > Except if you entered this branch, that means you passed an unsigned >> > long long dividend (AKA u64), otherwise you would go in DIV_ROUND_UP(). >> > Am I missing something? >> >> Sure, inside that branch, it does. >> But the compiler considers the whole ternary operator construction, i.e. >> both branches. > > Yes, and that's my point. The (__typeof__(dividend)) when placed like > you did is ambiguous. It looks like you're doing a useless cast, while > what you're actually fixing is the case where dividend is an u32 (AKA > unsigned long), and from the reader PoV, the code you're fixing > shouldn't even be reached. Hence my suggestion to move the case one > level up and add a comment ;-).
OK.
>> >> > How about: >> >> > >> >> > /* >> >> > * Cast to type of dividend is needed here to guarantee that the >> >> > * result won't be an unsigned long long when the dividend is an >> >> > * unsigned long, which is what the compiler does when it sees a >> >> >> >> s/an unsigned long/32-bit/ >> >> >> >> > * ternary operator with 2 different return types. >> >> > */ >> >> > (__typeof__(dividend))(sizeof(dividend) == sizeof(u32) ? \ >> > >> > To be completely safe and handle cases where dividend is an unsigned >> > short or an unsigned, we should probably have: >> > >> > (__typeof__(dividend))(sizeof(dividend) == sizeof(unsigned long long) ? \ >> >> "> sizeof(u32)"? >> >> /me starts to think about uint128_t... > > sizeof(dividend) <= sizeof(unsigned long) ? > DIV_ROUND_UP(dividend, divisor) : > DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL(dividend, divisor); > > Problem solved :-)
BTW, this will still fail (silently) with uint128_t. But we don't care.
And it will do the right thing when passed an unsigned long on 64-bit systems.
> Is the following version okay?
I think it is.
Thanks!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
-- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
| |