include/uapi/linux/bits.h | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Commit 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
did not take in account that the usage of BITS_PER_LONG in __GENMASK() was
changed to __BITS_PER_LONG for UAPI-safety in
commit 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK").
BITS_PER_LONG can not be used in UAPI headers as it derives from the kernel
configuration and not from the current compiler invocation.
When building compat userspace code or a compat vDSO its value will be
incorrect.
Switch back to __BITS_PER_LONG.
Fixes: 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
---
include/uapi/linux/bits.h | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bits.h b/include/uapi/linux/bits.h
index 682b406e10679dc8baa188830ab0811e7e3e13e3..a04afef9efca42f062e142fcb33f5d267512b1e5 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/bits.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/bits.h
@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@
#ifndef _UAPI_LINUX_BITS_H
#define _UAPI_LINUX_BITS_H
-#define __GENMASK(h, l) (((~_UL(0)) << (l)) & (~_UL(0) >> (BITS_PER_LONG - 1 - (h))))
+#define __GENMASK(h, l) (((~_UL(0)) << (l)) & (~_UL(0) >> (__BITS_PER_LONG - 1 - (h))))
-#define __GENMASK_ULL(h, l) (((~_ULL(0)) << (l)) & (~_ULL(0) >> (BITS_PER_LONG_LONG - 1 - (h))))
+#define __GENMASK_ULL(h, l) (((~_ULL(0)) << (l)) & (~_ULL(0) >> (__BITS_PER_LONG_LONG - 1 - (h))))
#define __GENMASK_U128(h, l) \
((_BIT128((h)) << 1) - (_BIT128(l)))
---
base-commit: e271ed52b344ac02d4581286961d0c40acc54c03
change-id: 20250606-uapi-genmask-e07667de69ec
Best regards,
--
Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 10:23:57AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> Commit 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
> did not take in account that the usage of BITS_PER_LONG in __GENMASK() was
> changed to __BITS_PER_LONG for UAPI-safety in
> commit 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK").
> BITS_PER_LONG can not be used in UAPI headers as it derives from the kernel
> configuration and not from the current compiler invocation.
> When building compat userspace code or a compat vDSO its value will be
> incorrect.
>
> Switch back to __BITS_PER_LONG.
>
> Fixes: 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Thanks Thomas. I applied it in bitmap-for-next. Is that issue critical
enough for you to send a pull request in -rc2?
Thanks,
Yury
On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 10:20:56AM -0400, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 10:23:57AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > Commit 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
> > did not take in account that the usage of BITS_PER_LONG in __GENMASK() was
> > changed to __BITS_PER_LONG for UAPI-safety in
> > commit 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK").
> > BITS_PER_LONG can not be used in UAPI headers as it derives from the kernel
> > configuration and not from the current compiler invocation.
> > When building compat userspace code or a compat vDSO its value will be
> > incorrect.
> >
> > Switch back to __BITS_PER_LONG.
> >
> > Fixes: 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
>
> Thanks Thomas. I applied it in bitmap-for-next. Is that issue critical
> enough for you to send a pull request in -rc2?
I have some patches that depend on it. These will probably end up in linux-next
soonish and would then break there.
So having it in -rc2 would be nice.
Thanks
On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 04:32:22PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 10:20:56AM -0400, Yury Norov wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 10:23:57AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > Commit 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
> > > did not take in account that the usage of BITS_PER_LONG in __GENMASK() was
> > > changed to __BITS_PER_LONG for UAPI-safety in
> > > commit 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK").
> > > BITS_PER_LONG can not be used in UAPI headers as it derives from the kernel
> > > configuration and not from the current compiler invocation.
> > > When building compat userspace code or a compat vDSO its value will be
> > > incorrect.
> > >
> > > Switch back to __BITS_PER_LONG.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
> > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> >
> > Thanks Thomas. I applied it in bitmap-for-next. Is that issue critical
> > enough for you to send a pull request in -rc2?
>
> I have some patches that depend on it. These will probably end up in linux-next
> soonish and would then break there.
>
> So having it in -rc2 would be nice.
>
>
> Thanks
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for pointing out the problem, may I ask in what config would
cause "BITS_PER_LONG" to work incorrectly ?
I would love to test the difference between them and see what I can get,
thanks.
Best regards,
I Hsin Cheng
Hi I Hsin Cheng,
On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 03:47:49PM +0800, I Hsin Cheng wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 04:32:22PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 10:20:56AM -0400, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 10:23:57AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > > Commit 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
> > > > did not take in account that the usage of BITS_PER_LONG in __GENMASK() was
> > > > changed to __BITS_PER_LONG for UAPI-safety in
> > > > commit 3c7a8e190bc5 ("uapi: introduce uapi-friendly macros for GENMASK").
> > > > BITS_PER_LONG can not be used in UAPI headers as it derives from the kernel
> > > > configuration and not from the current compiler invocation.
> > > > When building compat userspace code or a compat vDSO its value will be
> > > > incorrect.
> > > >
> > > > Switch back to __BITS_PER_LONG.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 1e7933a575ed ("uapi: Revert "bitops: avoid integer overflow in GENMASK(_ULL)"")
> > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
> > >
> > > Thanks Thomas. I applied it in bitmap-for-next. Is that issue critical
> > > enough for you to send a pull request in -rc2?
> >
> > I have some patches that depend on it. These will probably end up in linux-next
> > soonish and would then break there.
> >
> > So having it in -rc2 would be nice.
>
> Thanks for pointing out the problem, may I ask in what config would
> cause "BITS_PER_LONG" to work incorrectly ?
In my specific usecase it was when building the powerpc compat vDSO.
For an easy reproducer use:
diff --git a/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c b/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c
index 93ef801a97ef..948619848a3b 100644
--- a/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c
+++ b/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c
@@ -16,6 +16,9 @@
# define VDSO_DELTA_MASK(vd) (vd->mask)
#endif
+_Static_assert(__BITS_PER_LONG == sizeof(long) * 8);
+_Static_assert(BITS_PER_LONG == sizeof(long) * 8);
+
#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_VDSO_OVERFLOW_PROTECT
static __always_inline bool vdso_delta_ok(const struct vdso_clock *vc, u64 delta)
{
> I would love to test the difference between them and see what I can get,
> thanks.
Looking at this again, the UAPI headers don't even define BITS_PER_LONG.
The vDSO just incorrectly ends up also using the regular kernel headers.
Thomas
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.