user/sven/linux.git/include/linux/bitfield.h, branch v4.14.262

bitfield.h: don't compile-time validate _val in FIELD_FIT

2020-08-21T07:48:15Z

commit 444da3f52407d74c9aa12187ac6b01f76ee47d62 upstream. When ur_load_imm_any() is inlined into jeq_imm(), it's possible for the compiler to deduce a case where _val can only have the value of -1 at compile time. Specifically, /* struct bpf_insn: _s32 imm */ u64 imm = insn->imm; /* sign extend */ if (imm >> 32) { /* non-zero only if insn->imm is negative */ /* inlined from ur_load_imm_any */ u32 __imm = imm >> 32; /* therefore, always 0xffffffff */ if (__builtin_constant_p(__imm) && __imm > 255) compiletime_assert_XXX() This can result in tripping a BUILD_BUG_ON() in __BF_FIELD_CHECK() that checks that a given value is representable in one byte (interpreted as unsigned). FIELD_FIT() should return true or false at runtime for whether a value can fit for not. Don't break the build over a value that's too large for the mask. We'd prefer to keep the inlining and compiler optimizations though we know this case will always return false. Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 1697599ee301a ("bitfield.h: add FIELD_FIT() helper") Link: https://lore.kernel.org/kernel-hardening/CAK7LNASvb0UDJ0U5wkYYRzTAdnEs64HjXpEUL7d=V0CXiAXcNw@mail.gmail.com/ Reported-by: Masahiro Yamada Debugged-by: Sami Tolvanen Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers Signed-off-by: David S. Miller Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

include/linux/bitfield.h: remove 32bit from FIELD_GET comment block

2017-10-04T00:54:25Z

I do not see anything that restricts this macro to 32 bit width. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1505921975-23379-1-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada Acked-by: Jakub Kicinski Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

bitfield.h: add FIELD_FIT() helper

2017-02-10T20:52:24Z

Add a helper for checking at runtime that a value will fit inside a specified field/mask. Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski Signed-off-by: David S. Miller

add basic register-field manipulation macros

2016-09-09T09:09:24Z

Common approach to accessing register fields is to define structures or sets of macros containing mask and shift pair. Operations on the register are then performed as follows: field = (reg >> shift) & mask; reg &= ~(mask << shift); reg |= (field & mask) << shift; Defining shift and mask separately is tedious. Ivo van Doorn came up with an idea of computing them at compilation time based on a single shifted mask (later refined by Felix) which can be used like this: #define REG_FIELD 0x000ff000 field = FIELD_GET(REG_FIELD, reg); reg &= ~REG_FIELD; reg |= FIELD_PREP(REG_FIELD, field); FIELD_{GET,PREP} macros take care of finding out what the appropriate shift is based on compilation time ffs operation. GENMASK can be used to define registers (which is usually less error-prone and easier to match with datasheets). This approach is the most convenient I've seen so to limit code multiplication let's move the macros to a global header file. Attempts to use static inlines instead of macros failed due to false positive triggering of BUILD_BUG_ON()s, especially with GCC < 6.0. Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski Reviewed-by: Dinan Gunawardena Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo