From f9919116b8c226428df28bc69ab33480eaa1ee6d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eric Blake Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 11:26:02 -0500 Subject: osdep: Make MIN/MAX evaluate arguments only once I'm not aware of any immediate bugs in qemu where a second runtime evaluation of the arguments to MIN() or MAX() causes a problem, but proactively preventing such abuse is easier than falling prey to an unintended case down the road. At any rate, here's the conversation that sparked the current patch: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-12/msg05718.html Update the MIN/MAX macros to only evaluate their argument once at runtime; this uses typeof(1 ? (a) : (b)) to ensure that we are promoting the temporaries to the same type as the final comparison (we have to trigger type promotion, as typeof(bitfield) won't compile; and we can't use typeof((a) + (b)) or even typeof((a) + 0), as some of our uses of MAX are on void* pointers where such addition is undefined). However, we are unable to work around gcc refusing to compile ({}) in a constant context (such as the array length of a static variable), even when only used in the dead branch of a __builtin_choose_expr(), so we have to provide a second macro pair MIN_CONST and MAX_CONST for use when both arguments are known to be compile-time constants and where the result must also be usable as a constant; this second form evaluates arguments multiple times but that doesn't matter for constants. By using a void expression as the expansion if a non-constant is presented to this second form, we can enlist the compiler to ensure the double evaluation is not attempted on non-constants. Alas, as both macros now rely on compiler intrinsics, they are no longer usable in preprocessor #if conditions; those will just have to be open-coded or the logic rewritten into #define or runtime 'if' conditions (but where the compiler dead-code-elimination will probably still apply). I tested that both gcc 10.1.1 and clang 10.0.0 produce errors for all forms of macro mis-use. As the errors can sometimes be cryptic, I'm demonstrating the gcc output: Use of MIN when MIN_CONST is needed: In file included from /home/eblake/qemu/qemu-img.c:25: /home/eblake/qemu/include/qemu/osdep.h:249:5: error: braced-group within expression allowed only inside a function 249 | ({ \ | ^ /home/eblake/qemu/qemu-img.c:92:12: note: in expansion of macro ‘MIN’ 92 | char array[MIN(1, 2)] = ""; | ^~~ Use of MIN_CONST when MIN is needed: /home/eblake/qemu/qemu-img.c: In function ‘is_allocated_sectors’: /home/eblake/qemu/qemu-img.c:1225:15: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be 1225 | i = MIN_CONST(i, n); | ^ Use of MIN in the preprocessor: In file included from /home/eblake/qemu/accel/tcg/translate-all.c:20: /home/eblake/qemu/accel/tcg/translate-all.c: In function ‘page_check_range’: /home/eblake/qemu/include/qemu/osdep.h:249:6: error: token "{" is not valid in preprocessor expressions 249 | ({ \ | ^ Fix the resulting callsites that used #if or computed a compile-time constant min or max to use the new macros. cpu-defs.h is interesting, as CPU_TLB_DYN_MAX_BITS is sometimes used as a constant and sometimes dynamic. It may be worth improving glib's MIN/MAX definitions to be saner, but that is a task for another day. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé Tested-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé Message-Id: <20200625162602.700741-1-eblake@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini --- include/qemu/osdep.h | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) (limited to 'include/qemu') diff --git a/include/qemu/osdep.h b/include/qemu/osdep.h index ff7c17b857..0d26a1b9bd 100644 --- a/include/qemu/osdep.h +++ b/include/qemu/osdep.h @@ -236,18 +236,55 @@ extern int daemon(int, int); #define SIZE_MAX ((size_t)-1) #endif -#ifndef MIN -#define MIN(a, b) (((a) < (b)) ? (a) : (b)) -#endif -#ifndef MAX -#define MAX(a, b) (((a) > (b)) ? (a) : (b)) -#endif +/* + * Two variations of MIN/MAX macros. The first is for runtime use, and + * evaluates arguments only once (so it is safe even with side + * effects), but will not work in constant contexts (such as array + * size declarations) because of the '{}'. The second is for constant + * expression use, where evaluating arguments twice is safe because + * the result is going to be constant anyway, but will not work in a + * runtime context because of a void expression where a value is + * expected. Thus, both gcc and clang will fail to compile if you use + * the wrong macro (even if the error may seem a bit cryptic). + * + * Note that neither form is usable as an #if condition; if you truly + * need to write conditional code that depends on a minimum or maximum + * determined by the pre-processor instead of the compiler, you'll + * have to open-code it. + */ +#undef MIN +#define MIN(a, b) \ + ({ \ + typeof(1 ? (a) : (b)) _a = (a), _b = (b); \ + _a < _b ? _a : _b; \ + }) +#define MIN_CONST(a, b) \ + __builtin_choose_expr( \ + __builtin_constant_p(a) && __builtin_constant_p(b), \ + (a) < (b) ? (a) : (b), \ + ((void)0)) +#undef MAX +#define MAX(a, b) \ + ({ \ + typeof(1 ? (a) : (b)) _a = (a), _b = (b); \ + _a > _b ? _a : _b; \ + }) +#define MAX_CONST(a, b) \ + __builtin_choose_expr( \ + __builtin_constant_p(a) && __builtin_constant_p(b), \ + (a) > (b) ? (a) : (b), \ + ((void)0)) -/* Minimum function that returns zero only iff both values are zero. - * Intended for use with unsigned values only. */ +/* + * Minimum function that returns zero only if both values are zero. + * Intended for use with unsigned values only. + */ #ifndef MIN_NON_ZERO -#define MIN_NON_ZERO(a, b) ((a) == 0 ? (b) : \ - ((b) == 0 ? (a) : (MIN(a, b)))) +#define MIN_NON_ZERO(a, b) \ + ({ \ + typeof(1 ? (a) : (b)) _a = (a), _b = (b); \ + _a == 0 ? _b : (_b == 0 || _b > _a) ? _a : _b; \ + }) #endif /* Round number down to multiple */ -- cgit v1.2.3-55-g7522