Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 9 May 2023 14:34:51 -0700
From:   Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
To:     Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com>
CC:     <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Christian =?utf-8?B?S8O2bmln?= <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-xe] [PATCH 2/3] linux/bits.h: Add fixed-width GENMASK and
 BIT macros
Message-ID: <iakuowef3ysobpcpa6f74kolw44zyjepb5byjxljp4mxuwunkn@rdegvnuzbnmi>
References: <20230509051403.2748545-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
 <20230509051403.2748545-3-lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
 <168364083689.27719.2337781022536351304@gjsousa-mobl2>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <168364083689.27719.2337781022536351304@gjsousa-mobl2>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?iBtOR1IE3aHL/6t1J3IX65PhlLBR8j/FEdwvZDAxz4kOYJgNytdInKU4e6qW?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ZLvpPC6TueITr32BJ9lcekVWcyHxGoxqtl7EFvzFH/zk+mSEqw6TxOCRMOPN?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?SBQ/Rs27ouuFDBBxQhy2kcg9yD+/yAHu3Evw5kKBWi3RmWMK/iuysN2zDA9m?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?zHrklPSVWsN8CV524C6+tlxgdfKktXk0hHpSYYYwXHJJT8wjdpLqrYI9JeoB?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?tt3vDtzfd2yxkUeA0W5VqiQB5AtRR5hjSC0Rw1UOdN1650WNzTGte8pQuNTa?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?QBl1stOY/WDAeDHj34gl3v83m6lU8T0/Ih3EgZbrPYUg2HcpQviDBhgMiHye?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?WHNI05Cl0I26E/vMfZRWTgJuLX5KygOfd2ILOc4o+X5vCG0KNv5AXNENy/lK?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?RSRxTHBYuGZo3uAorE3Ih+hCtH6ms/cLPaggtfUag74Bt/Li0VdfPyiB2BFF?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?P276jYlfZhITIDkGnmQeUQXSOQU7/OecEj2JwteADV1+0SYjc32chvzYFwGS?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?JPtMLRqPGZmGAjGRnVbwWh4JQ5fmqfOU1ZywsqeLGZLL2jybDD9ivW5ikLG/?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?IBZftMnRwfY0QAlcSBTV+uKXUq7DsopDT5qDigpMZe5LzeGQye/wslaL3WYm?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?uUp2ZFdU69BdyRH6SheM8IF4X8xdLlGUeELPBUYogs8THTrQlEyMECYEwb6S?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?7eZmur9fkPMEenDti/jpbfyfLmkVmd5rsBYoZZeUzgrIgrCHlS27S5b9lgxi?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?CiED3xVqwepbUN/Ug9CQ27+sA6P8+TBp4O5eLSn0PDFXGjTXsZMjsUOeZGu0?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?iP0z0lCNsipPRhVNkOrWOhfwK8nE6jJ0H+uOyvv91Ms2jWmIBIEp1u1cBMBV?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?M/yj5+4r/rRSC5Eab90gMCLeS2EF7H7CBTWIVrkbpSdnIUuzMo9USMzBe8HK?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?b9Y74UCcz+vTDkKtmi7B0peBpAqqetrtyC31JI8aLavY5QPGpcseE/j3hC2p?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?zLXlwpW+qpV9xzUQjnaxWlTxVd6OAXHxLxXfxAqkli1dkGDTNp7k2zyQyIPK?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?VI1B7WRDbU0ExICGRpj5nZMvpjUKC4729nVhWZCL2iS4kiOTb+QNkt0oj0my?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?2TWNIt6xVqAoDwNIUzZTch7z7J/PF4wxg8zmL1OXwnaz5klmaTTcHHzPsQ5O?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?1csVTLkuNBpV8T/8cVLXCtGhsNFfebl1pWN9AKHz38JAoM87NGKLPJ121l99?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?pSQor83dJj3Zm1PXVajGVxnN+UwcQh/tJCOfB8SMMOImWboC0AySWVM+HQ6a?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?QrAnJTzmIE4J0IuTA5mBi5p45at7PRZY6pAvKGZsNZpYX1DxLLcFYetYchPP?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?L8hK72tWjOqtJtmCkOlUILaWwuudemJXzw0Doakr/B/VNWX1f39Hlq+5CsJZ?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?COisX5XhBCfRZZE5BnaeX6luZD2tZWBwxtD1LpRBVClsS+St3kh7hAnssNku?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?N+X2jIKAOv14BQ1Pj2+toeQH7qHju629/biWXU1nho7U0g775APk99CGgBXv?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?w9RbHmzBWmVj3XMiOIOZ108LFUS5+jShvbylZ7sEHgjlO2rxXGTr7WurXylO?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Vw=3D=3D?=
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 44dceb25-e1e5-46b8-d8a4-08db50d53ae2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: CY5PR11MB6139.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 May 2023 21:34:55.1486
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: FB4StLGrZxO9sKD97I1n1KWIIJ2vRsKG4s8naueaSanr7fhsOmS4Q8HFAB6MrWyE1BdNtKJuI23Si7UWkuo/bkGMQ3gqj/zzDDgM1OtYrHI=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR11MB4577
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
        DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,
        SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_BLOCKED
        autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
        lindbergh.monkeyblade.net
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 11:00:36AM -0300, Gustavo Sousa wrote:
>Quoting Lucas De Marchi (2023-05-09 02:14:02)
>>Add GENMASK_U32(), GENMASK_U16() and GENMASK_U8()  macros to create
>>masks for fixed-width types and also the corresponding BIT_U32(),
>>BIT_U16() and BIT_U8().
>>
>>All of those depend on a new "U" suffix added to the integer constant.
>>Due to naming clashes it's better to call the macro U32. Since C doesn't
>>have a proper suffix for short and char types, the U16 and U18 variants
>>just use U32 with one additional check in the BIT_* macros to make
>>sure the compiler gives an error when the those types overflow.
>>The BIT_U16() and BIT_U8() need the help of GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(),
>>as otherwise they would allow an invalid bit to be passed. Hence
>>implement them in include/linux/bits.h rather than together with
>>the other BIT* variants.
>>
>>The following test file is is used to test this:
>>
>>        $ cat mask.c
>>        #include <linux/types.h>
>>        #include <linux/bits.h>
>>
>>        static const u32 a = GENMASK_U32(31, 0);
>>        static const u16 b = GENMASK_U16(15, 0);
>>        static const u8 c = GENMASK_U8(7, 0);
>>        static const u32 x = BIT_U32(31);
>>        static const u16 y = BIT_U16(15);
>>        static const u8 z = BIT_U8(7);
>>
>>        #if FAIL
>>        static const u32 a2 = GENMASK_U32(32, 0);
>>        static const u16 b2 = GENMASK_U16(16, 0);
>>        static const u8 c2 = GENMASK_U8(8, 0);
>>        static const u32 x2 = BIT_U32(32);
>>        static const u16 y2 = BIT_U16(16);
>>        static const u8 z2 = BIT_U8(8);
>>        #endif
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
>>---
>> include/linux/bits.h       | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/uapi/linux/const.h |  2 ++
>> include/vdso/const.h       |  1 +
>> 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
>>
>>diff --git a/include/linux/bits.h b/include/linux/bits.h
>>index 7c0cf5031abe..ff4786c99b8c 100644
>>--- a/include/linux/bits.h
>>+++ b/include/linux/bits.h
>>@@ -42,4 +42,26 @@
>> #define GENMASK_ULL(h, l) \
>>        (GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(h, l) + __GENMASK_ULL(h, l))
>>
>>+#define __GENMASK_U32(h, l) \
>>+  (((~U32(0)) - (U32(1) << (l)) + 1) & \
>>+   (~U32(0) >> (32 - 1 - (h))))
>>+#define GENMASK_U32(h, l) \
>>+  (GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(h, l) + __GENMASK_U32(h, l))
>>+
>>+#define __GENMASK_U16(h, l) \
>>+  ((U32(0xffff) - (U32(1) << (l)) + 1) & \
>>+   (U32(0xffff) >> (16 - 1 - (h))))
>>+#define GENMASK_U16(h, l) \
>>+  (GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(h, l) + __GENMASK_U16(h, l))
>>+
>>+#define __GENMASK_U8(h, l) \
>>+  (((U32(0xff)) - (U32(1) << (l)) + 1) & \
>>+   (U32(0xff) >> (8 - 1 - (h))))
>>+#define GENMASK_U8(h, l) \
>>+  (GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(h, l) + __GENMASK_U8(h, l))
>
>I wonder if we should use BIT_U* variants in the above to ensure the values are
>valid. If so, we get a nice boundary check and we also can use a single
>definition for the mask generation:
>
>  #define __GENMASK_U32(h, l) \
>          (((~U32(0)) - (U32(1) << (l)) + 1) & \
>           (~U32(0) >> (32 - 1 - (h))))

the boundary for h and l are already covered here because (32 - 1 - (h))
would lead to a negative value if h >= 32. Similar reason for l

Doing ~U32(0) didn't work for me as it wouldn't catch the invalid values
due to expanding to U32_MAX


>  #define GENMASK_U32(h, l) \
>          (GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(h, l) + __GENMASK_U32(BIT_U32(h), BIT_U32(l)))

							^^^^
that doesn't really work as BIT_U32(h) would expand here,
creating the equivalent of

	~U32(0) >> (32 - 1 - (BIT_U32(h))),

which is not what we want

>  #define GENMASK_U16(h, l) \
>          (GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(h, l) + __GENMASK_U32(BIT_U16(h), BIT_U16(l)))
>  #define GENMASK_U8(h, l) \
>          (GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(h, l) + __GENMASK_U32(BIT_U8(h), BIT_U8(l)))
>
>>+
>>+#define BIT_U32(nr)       _BITU32(nr)
>>+#define BIT_U16(nr)       (GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(16 - 1, nr) + (U32(1) << (nr)))
>>+#define BIT_U8(nr)        (GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(32 - 1, nr) + (U32(1) << (nr)))
>
>Shouldn't this be GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK(8 - 1, nr)?

ugh, good catch. Thanks

I will think if I can come up with something that reuses a single
__GENMASK_U(). Meanwhile I improved my negative tests to cover more
cases.

Lucas De Marchi


>
>--
>Gustavo Sousa
>
>>+
>> #endif /* __LINUX_BITS_H */
>>diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/const.h b/include/uapi/linux/const.h
>>index a429381e7ca5..3a4e152520f4 100644
>>--- a/include/uapi/linux/const.h
>>+++ b/include/uapi/linux/const.h
>>@@ -22,9 +22,11 @@
>> #define _AT(T,X)       ((T)(X))
>> #endif
>>
>>+#define _U32(x)           (_AC(x, U))
>> #define _UL(x)         (_AC(x, UL))
>> #define _ULL(x)                (_AC(x, ULL))
>>
>>+#define _BITU32(x)        (_U32(1) << (x))
>> #define _BITUL(x)      (_UL(1) << (x))
>> #define _BITULL(x)     (_ULL(1) << (x))
>>
>>diff --git a/include/vdso/const.h b/include/vdso/const.h
>>index 94b385ad438d..417384a9795b 100644
>>--- a/include/vdso/const.h
>>+++ b/include/vdso/const.h
>>@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>>
>> #include <uapi/linux/const.h>
>>
>>+#define U32(x)            (_U32(x))
>> #define UL(x)          (_UL(x))
>> #define ULL(x)         (_ULL(x))
>>
>>--
>>2.40.1
>>