This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix i386 memmove issue [BZ #22644]
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Andrew Senkevich <andrew dot n dot senkevich at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs dot nagy at arm dot com>, Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, nd <nd at arm dot com>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Max Horn <max at quendi dot de>, thomas at grindinggear dot com
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 10:57:50 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix i386 memmove issue [BZ #22644]
- References: <CAMXFM3s5b2a6o_CMS0cJ35oE3SuJUHssqLAUY94LSZhEEtG71A@mail.gmail.com> <mvm606ts2w6.fsf@suse.de> <CAMXFM3vqw7eiUT1XYVZWyW=eJkgEpjNc74A8mbmdKuR_hywN3w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMe9rOo4Ys=ScEKKnuv5XvYqTHjvFxSkXjch8ya8sX7dfP+q4Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAMXFM3vA=-LSK5VtKhhbs0g9faBdG0GjoAbNb6OPEbSt8dAA7A@mail.gmail.com> <mvmlgeojjmi.fsf@suse.de> <597954a1-85da-e524-1454-27c46af57413@redhat.com> <e7d81f18-315c-4434-a734-41029c0d387f@arm.com> <8c8ab285-bddc-90e6-a50e-7be89703367a@redhat.com> <CAMXFM3s39wwjHt=5PBp=Np8Rp=mXHfPwMq6_evtfx9MV08-mtQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 10:52 AM, Andrew Senkevich
<andrew.n.senkevich@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2018-03-19 16:33 GMT+01:00 Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>:
>> On 03/19/2018 03:25 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
>>>
>>> i thought not using MAP_FIXED is the 'non-overriding MAP_FIXED variant'
>
> Hmm, I tried so and had got much bigger address. But now I see it
> works (with size just 0x20000000 and 0x70000000 as a hint) in both 64
> and 32 bit cases, so proposing the following:
>
> diff --git a/string/test-memmove.c b/string/test-memmove.c
> index edc7a4c..fa4037d 100644
> --- a/string/test-memmove.c
> +++ b/string/test-memmove.c
> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> # define TEST_NAME "memmove"
> #endif
> #include "test-string.h"
> +#include <support/test-driver.h>
>
> char *simple_memmove (char *, const char *, size_t);
>
> @@ -245,6 +246,59 @@ do_random_tests (void)
> }
> }
>
> +static void
> +do_test2 (void)
> +{
> + size_t size = 0x20000000;
> + uint32_t * large_buf;
> +
> + large_buf = mmap ((void*)0x70000000, size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> + MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANON, -1, 0);
> +
> + if (large_buf == MAP_FAILED)
> + error (EXIT_UNSUPPORTED, errno, "Large mmap failed");
> +
> + if ((uintptr_t)large_buf > 0x80000000 - 128)
Don't you need to test if address is too low such that
0x80000000 - (uintptr_t)large_buf > 0x20000000?
> + {
> + error (0, 0,"Large mmap doesn't cross 0x80000000 boundary");
> + ret = EXIT_UNSUPPORTED;
> + munmap((void *)large_buf, size);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + uint32_t bytes_move = 0x80000000 - (uintptr_t)large_buf;
> + uint32_t arr_size = bytes_move / sizeof(uint32_t);
> + uint32_t i;
Please use size_t instead of uint32_t since 64-bit test is added now.
> + FOR_EACH_IMPL (impl, 0)
> + {
> + for (i = 0; i < arr_size; i++)
> + large_buf[i] = i;
> +
> + uint32_t * dst = &large_buf[33];
> +
> +#ifdef TEST_BCOPY
> + CALL (impl, (char *)large_buf, (char *)dst, bytes_move);
> +#else
> + CALL (impl, (char *)dst, (char *)large_buf, bytes_move);
> +#endif
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < arr_size; i++)
> + {
> + if (dst[i] != i)
> + {
> + error (0, 0,
> + "Wrong result in function %s dst \"%p\" src \"%p\" offset \"%d\"",
> + impl->name, dst, large_buf, i);
> + ret = 1;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +
> + munmap((void *)large_buf, size);
> +}
> +
> int
> test_main (void)
> {
> @@ -284,6 +338,9 @@ test_main (void)
> }
>
> do_random_tests ();
> +
> + do_test2 ();
> +
> return ret;
> }
>
> Ok?
>
>
> --
> WBR,
> Andrew
--
H.J.