From: Paul E. McKenney
> Sent: 05 October 2020 00:32
...
> manual/kernel: Add a litmus test with a hidden dependency
>
> This commit adds a litmus test that has a data dependency that can be
> hidden by control flow. In this test, both the taken and the not-taken
> branches of an "if" statement must be accounted for in order to properly
> analyze the litmus test. But herd7 looks only at individual executions
> in isolation, so fails to see the dependency.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <st...@rowland.harvard.edu>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@kernel.org>
>
> diff --git a/manual/kernel/crypto-control-data.litmus
> b/manual/kernel/crypto-control-data.litmus
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..6baecf9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/manual/kernel/crypto-control-data.litmus
> @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
> +C crypto-control-data
> +(*
> + * LB plus crypto-control-data plus data
> + *
> + * Result: Sometimes
> + *
> + * This is an example of OOTA and we would like it to be forbidden.
> + * The WRITE_ONCE in P0 is both data-dependent and (at the hardware level)
> + * control-dependent on the preceding READ_ONCE. But the dependencies are
> + * hidden by the form of the conditional control construct, hence the
> + * name "crypto-control-data". The memory model doesn't recognize them.
> + *)
> +
> +{}
> +
> +P0(int *x, int *y)
> +{
> + int r1;
> +
> + r1 = 1;
> + if (READ_ONCE(*x) == 0)
> + r1 = 0;
> + WRITE_ONCE(*y, r1);
> +}
Hmmm.... the compiler will semi-randomly transform that to/from:
if (READ_ONCE(*x) == 0)
r1 = 0;
else
r1 = 1;
and
r1 = READ_ONCE(*x) != 0;
Both of which (probably) get correctly detected as a write to *y
that is dependant on *x - so is 'problematic' with P1() which
does the opposite assignment.
Which does rather imply that hurd is a bit broken.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT,
UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
