commit 89b158635ad79574bde8e94d45dad33f8cf09549 upstream.
LZ4 final literal copy could be overlapped when doing
in-place decompression, so it's unsafe to just use memcpy()
on an optimized memcpy approach but memmove() instead.
Upstream LZ4 has updated this years ago [1] (and the impact
is non-sensible [2] plus only a few bytes remain), this commit
just synchronizes LZ4 upstream code to the kernel side as well.
It can be observed as EROFS in-place decompression failure
on specific files when X86_FEATURE_ERMS is unsupported,
memcpy() optimization of commit 59daa706fbec ("x86, mem:
Optimize memcpy by avoiding memory false dependece") will
be enabled then.
Currently most modern x86-CPUs support ERMS, these CPUs just
use "rep movsb" approach so no problem at all. However, it can
still be verified with forcely disabling ERMS feature...
arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S:
ALTERNATIVE_2 "jmp memcpy_orig", "", X86_FEATURE_REP_GOOD, \
- "jmp memcpy_erms", X86_FEATURE_ERMS
+ "jmp memcpy_orig", X86_FEATURE_ERMS
We didn't observe any strange on arm64/arm/x86 platform before
since most memcpy() would behave in an increasing address order
("copy upwards" [3]) and it's the correct order of in-place
decompression but it really needs an update to memmove() for sure
considering it's an undefined behavior according to the standard
and some unique optimization already exists in the kernel.
[1] https://github.com/lz4/lz4/commit/33cb8518ac385835cc17be9a770b27b40cd0e15b
[2] https://github.com/lz4/lz4/pull/717#issuecomment-497818921
[3] https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12518
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201122030749.2698994-1-hsiangkao@xxxxxxxxxx
Reviewed-by: Nick Terrell <terrelln@xxxxxx>
Cc: Yann Collet <yann.collet.73@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Miao Xie <miaoxie@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Chao Yu <yuchao0@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Li Guifu <bluce.liguifu@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Guo Xuenan <guoxuenan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Hi,
Please kindly consider these two backports to 5.4.y and 5.10.y LTS
kernels, and the reason shown as above (it could cause lz4 in-place
decompression (mainly EROFS) failure due to the different designed
memcpy overlapped behavior on x86 if ERMS is unsupported.) The lz4
upstream commit itself has been merged for 2 years. And the linux
upstream commit is also merged for months without any other
regression.
And in principle, it won't have any real impact at all, so I think
it's now safe to backport this to LTS kernels for unsupported ERMS
x86s.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
lib/lz4/lz4_decompress.c | 6 +++++-
lib/lz4/lz4defs.h | 2 ++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/lz4/lz4_decompress.c b/lib/lz4/lz4_decompress.c
index 0c9d3ad17e0f..4d0b59fa5550 100644
--- a/lib/lz4/lz4_decompress.c
+++ b/lib/lz4/lz4_decompress.c
@@ -260,7 +260,11 @@ static FORCE_INLINE int LZ4_decompress_generic(
}
}
- memcpy(op, ip, length);
+ /*
+ * supports overlapping memory regions; only matters
+ * for in-place decompression scenarios
+ */
+ LZ4_memmove(op, ip, length);
ip += length;
op += length;
diff --git a/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h b/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
index 1a7fa9d9170f..369eb181d730 100644
--- a/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
+++ b/lib/lz4/lz4defs.h
@@ -137,6 +137,8 @@ static FORCE_INLINE void LZ4_writeLE16(void *memPtr, U16 value)
return put_unaligned_le16(value, memPtr);
}
+#define LZ4_memmove(dst, src, size) __builtin_memmove(dst, src, size)
+
static FORCE_INLINE void LZ4_copy8(void *dst, const void *src)
{
#if LZ4_ARCH64
--
1.8.3.1
