| Message ID | 27de70dcc356e56754a03a2887a97597f5e840a4.1725278148.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Wire up getrandom() vDSO implementation on powerpc | expand |
On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 02:04:42PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > SYM_FUNC_START(__arch_chacha20_blocks_nostack) > #ifdef __powerpc64__ > - blr > + std r5, -216(r1) > + > + std r14, -144(r1) > + std r15, -136(r1) > + std r16, -128(r1) > + std r17, -120(r1) > + std r18, -112(r1) > + std r19, -104(r1) > + std r20, -96(r1) > + std r21, -88(r1) > + std r22, -80(r1) > + std r23, -72(r1) > + std r24, -64(r1) > + std r25, -56(r1) > + std r26, -48(r1) > + std r27, -40(r1) > + std r28, -32(r1) > + std r29, -24(r1) > + std r30, -16(r1) > + std r31, -8(r1) > #else > stwu r1, -96(r1) > stw r5, 20(r1) > +#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ > stmw r14, 24(r1) > +#else > + stw r14, 24(r1) > + stw r15, 28(r1) > + stw r16, 32(r1) > + stw r17, 36(r1) > + stw r18, 40(r1) > + stw r19, 44(r1) > + stw r20, 48(r1) > + stw r21, 52(r1) > + stw r22, 56(r1) > + stw r23, 60(r1) > + stw r24, 64(r1) > + stw r25, 68(r1) > + stw r26, 72(r1) > + stw r27, 76(r1) > + stw r28, 80(r1) > + stw r29, 84(r1) > + stw r30, 88(r1) > + stw r31, 92(r1) > +#endif > +#endif This confuses me. Why are you adding code to the !__powerpc64__ branch in this commit? (Also, why does stmw not work on LE?)
Le 02/09/2024 à 14:41, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit : > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 02:04:42PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: >> SYM_FUNC_START(__arch_chacha20_blocks_nostack) >> #ifdef __powerpc64__ >> - blr >> + std r5, -216(r1) >> + >> + std r14, -144(r1) >> + std r15, -136(r1) >> + std r16, -128(r1) >> + std r17, -120(r1) >> + std r18, -112(r1) >> + std r19, -104(r1) >> + std r20, -96(r1) >> + std r21, -88(r1) >> + std r22, -80(r1) >> + std r23, -72(r1) >> + std r24, -64(r1) >> + std r25, -56(r1) >> + std r26, -48(r1) >> + std r27, -40(r1) >> + std r28, -32(r1) >> + std r29, -24(r1) >> + std r30, -16(r1) >> + std r31, -8(r1) >> #else >> stwu r1, -96(r1) >> stw r5, 20(r1) >> +#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ >> stmw r14, 24(r1) >> +#else >> + stw r14, 24(r1) >> + stw r15, 28(r1) >> + stw r16, 32(r1) >> + stw r17, 36(r1) >> + stw r18, 40(r1) >> + stw r19, 44(r1) >> + stw r20, 48(r1) >> + stw r21, 52(r1) >> + stw r22, 56(r1) >> + stw r23, 60(r1) >> + stw r24, 64(r1) >> + stw r25, 68(r1) >> + stw r26, 72(r1) >> + stw r27, 76(r1) >> + stw r28, 80(r1) >> + stw r29, 84(r1) >> + stw r30, 88(r1) >> + stw r31, 92(r1) >> +#endif >> +#endif > > This confuses me. Why are you adding code to the !__powerpc64__ branch > in this commit? (Also, why does stmw not work on LE?) That's for the VDSO32 ie running 32 bits binaries on a 64 bits kernel. "Programming Environments Manual for 32-Bit Implementations of the PowerPC™ Architecture" say: In some implementations operating with little-endian byte order, execution of an lmw or stmw instruction causes the system alignment error handler to be invoked And GCC doesn't like it either: tools/arch/powerpc/vdso/vgetrandom-chacha.S:84: Error: `stmw' invalid when little-endian
On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 03:12:47PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 02/09/2024 à 14:41, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit : > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 02:04:42PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > >> SYM_FUNC_START(__arch_chacha20_blocks_nostack) > >> #ifdef __powerpc64__ > >> - blr > >> + std r5, -216(r1) > >> + > >> + std r14, -144(r1) > >> + std r15, -136(r1) > >> + std r16, -128(r1) > >> + std r17, -120(r1) > >> + std r18, -112(r1) > >> + std r19, -104(r1) > >> + std r20, -96(r1) > >> + std r21, -88(r1) > >> + std r22, -80(r1) > >> + std r23, -72(r1) > >> + std r24, -64(r1) > >> + std r25, -56(r1) > >> + std r26, -48(r1) > >> + std r27, -40(r1) > >> + std r28, -32(r1) > >> + std r29, -24(r1) > >> + std r30, -16(r1) > >> + std r31, -8(r1) > >> #else > >> stwu r1, -96(r1) > >> stw r5, 20(r1) > >> +#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ > >> stmw r14, 24(r1) > >> +#else > >> + stw r14, 24(r1) > >> + stw r15, 28(r1) > >> + stw r16, 32(r1) > >> + stw r17, 36(r1) > >> + stw r18, 40(r1) > >> + stw r19, 44(r1) > >> + stw r20, 48(r1) > >> + stw r21, 52(r1) > >> + stw r22, 56(r1) > >> + stw r23, 60(r1) > >> + stw r24, 64(r1) > >> + stw r25, 68(r1) > >> + stw r26, 72(r1) > >> + stw r27, 76(r1) > >> + stw r28, 80(r1) > >> + stw r29, 84(r1) > >> + stw r30, 88(r1) > >> + stw r31, 92(r1) > >> +#endif > >> +#endif > > > > This confuses me. Why are you adding code to the !__powerpc64__ branch > > in this commit? (Also, why does stmw not work on LE?) > > That's for the VDSO32 ie running 32 bits binaries on a 64 bits kernel. > > "Programming Environments Manual for 32-Bit Implementations of the > PowerPC™ Architecture" say: In some implementations operating with > little-endian byte order, execution of an lmw or stmw instruction > causes the system alignment error handler to be invoked > > And GCC doesn't like it either: > > tools/arch/powerpc/vdso/vgetrandom-chacha.S:84: Error: `stmw' invalid > when little-endian Does it make sense to do all the 32-bit stuff in the PPC32 commit (and then you can introduce the selftests there without the error you mentioned), and then add the 64-bit stuff in this commit?
Le 02/09/2024 à 16:00, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit : > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 03:12:47PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: >> >> >> Le 02/09/2024 à 14:41, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit : >>> On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 02:04:42PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: >>>> SYM_FUNC_START(__arch_chacha20_blocks_nostack) >>>> #ifdef __powerpc64__ >>>> - blr >>>> + std r5, -216(r1) >>>> + >>>> + std r14, -144(r1) >>>> + std r15, -136(r1) >>>> + std r16, -128(r1) >>>> + std r17, -120(r1) >>>> + std r18, -112(r1) >>>> + std r19, -104(r1) >>>> + std r20, -96(r1) >>>> + std r21, -88(r1) >>>> + std r22, -80(r1) >>>> + std r23, -72(r1) >>>> + std r24, -64(r1) >>>> + std r25, -56(r1) >>>> + std r26, -48(r1) >>>> + std r27, -40(r1) >>>> + std r28, -32(r1) >>>> + std r29, -24(r1) >>>> + std r30, -16(r1) >>>> + std r31, -8(r1) >>>> #else >>>> stwu r1, -96(r1) >>>> stw r5, 20(r1) >>>> +#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ >>>> stmw r14, 24(r1) >>>> +#else >>>> + stw r14, 24(r1) >>>> + stw r15, 28(r1) >>>> + stw r16, 32(r1) >>>> + stw r17, 36(r1) >>>> + stw r18, 40(r1) >>>> + stw r19, 44(r1) >>>> + stw r20, 48(r1) >>>> + stw r21, 52(r1) >>>> + stw r22, 56(r1) >>>> + stw r23, 60(r1) >>>> + stw r24, 64(r1) >>>> + stw r25, 68(r1) >>>> + stw r26, 72(r1) >>>> + stw r27, 76(r1) >>>> + stw r28, 80(r1) >>>> + stw r29, 84(r1) >>>> + stw r30, 88(r1) >>>> + stw r31, 92(r1) >>>> +#endif >>>> +#endif >>> >>> This confuses me. Why are you adding code to the !__powerpc64__ branch >>> in this commit? (Also, why does stmw not work on LE?) >> >> That's for the VDSO32 ie running 32 bits binaries on a 64 bits kernel. >> >> "Programming Environments Manual for 32-Bit Implementations of the >> PowerPC™ Architecture" say: In some implementations operating with >> little-endian byte order, execution of an lmw or stmw instruction >> causes the system alignment error handler to be invoked >> >> And GCC doesn't like it either: >> >> tools/arch/powerpc/vdso/vgetrandom-chacha.S:84: Error: `stmw' invalid >> when little-endian > > Does it make sense to do all the 32-bit stuff in the PPC32 commit (and > then you can introduce the selftests there without the error you > mentioned), and then add the 64-bit stuff in this commit? Can do that, but there will still be a problem with chacha selftests if I don't opt-out the entire function content when it is ppc64. It will build properly but if someone runs it on a ppc64 it will likely crash because only the low 32 bits of registers will be saved. That's the reason why I really prefered the approach where I set something in vdso_config.h so that the assembly is used only for powerpc32 and when building powerpc64 the assembly part is kept out and vdso_test_chacha simply tells it is not supported. Christophe
On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 04:16:48PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Can do that, but there will still be a problem with chacha selftests if > I don't opt-out the entire function content when it is ppc64. It will > build properly but if someone runs it on a ppc64 it will likely crash > because only the low 32 bits of registers will be saved. What if you don't wire up the selftests _at all_ until the ppc64 commit? Then there'll be no risk. (And I think I would prefer to see the 32-bit code all in the 32-bit commit; that'd make it more straight forward to review too.)
Hi Jason, hi Michael, Le 02/09/2024 à 16:19, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit : > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 04:16:48PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: >> Can do that, but there will still be a problem with chacha selftests if >> I don't opt-out the entire function content when it is ppc64. It will >> build properly but if someone runs it on a ppc64 it will likely crash >> because only the low 32 bits of registers will be saved. > > What if you don't wire up the selftests _at all_ until the ppc64 commit? > Then there'll be no risk. > > (And I think I would prefer to see the 32-bit code all in the 32-bit > commit; that'd make it more straight forward to review too.) I'd be fine with that but I'd like feedback from Michael on it: Is there a risk to only get PPC32 part merged as a first step or will both PPC32 and PPC64 go together anyway ? I would prefer not to delay PPC32 because someone doesn't feel confident with PPC64. Christophe
On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 04:27:12PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > Hi Jason, hi Michael, > > Le 02/09/2024 à 16:19, Jason A. Donenfeld a écrit : > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 04:16:48PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > >> Can do that, but there will still be a problem with chacha selftests if > >> I don't opt-out the entire function content when it is ppc64. It will > >> build properly but if someone runs it on a ppc64 it will likely crash > >> because only the low 32 bits of registers will be saved. > > > > What if you don't wire up the selftests _at all_ until the ppc64 commit? > > Then there'll be no risk. > > > > (And I think I would prefer to see the 32-bit code all in the 32-bit > > commit; that'd make it more straight forward to review too.) > > I'd be fine with that but I'd like feedback from Michael on it: Is there > a risk to only get PPC32 part merged as a first step or will both PPC32 > and PPC64 go together anyway ? > > I would prefer not to delay PPC32 because someone doesn't feel confident > with PPC64. I have no objection to applying these at the same time.
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig index 54b270ef18b1..b45452ac4a73 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig @@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ config PPC select SYSCTL_EXCEPTION_TRACE select THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK select TRACE_IRQFLAGS_SUPPORT - select VDSO_GETRANDOM if PPC32 + select VDSO_GETRANDOM # # Please keep this list sorted alphabetically. # diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mman.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mman.h index 17a77d47ed6d..42a51a993d94 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mman.h +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mman.h @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ #include <uapi/asm/mman.h> -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64 +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC64) && !defined(BUILD_VDSO) #include <asm/cputable.h> #include <linux/mm.h> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/Makefile b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/Makefile index af3ba61b022e..56fb1633529a 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/Makefile +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/Makefile @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ obj-vdso32 = sigtramp32-32.o gettimeofday-32.o datapage-32.o cacheflush-32.o not obj-vdso64 = sigtramp64-64.o gettimeofday-64.o datapage-64.o cacheflush-64.o note-64.o getcpu-64.o obj-vdso32 += getrandom-32.o vgetrandom-chacha-32.o -obj-vdso64 += getrandom-64.o +obj-vdso64 += getrandom-64.o vgetrandom-chacha-64.o ifneq ($(c-gettimeofday-y),) CFLAGS_vgettimeofday-32.o += -include $(c-gettimeofday-y) @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ endif ifneq ($(c-getrandom-y),) CFLAGS_vgetrandom-32.o += -include $(c-getrandom-y) + CFLAGS_vgetrandom-64.o += -include $(c-getrandom-y) $(call cc-option, -ffixed-r30) endif # Build rules @@ -35,10 +36,10 @@ endif targets := $(obj-vdso32) vdso32.so.dbg vgettimeofday-32.o vgetrandom-32.o targets += crtsavres-32.o obj-vdso32 := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(obj-vdso32)) -targets += $(obj-vdso64) vdso64.so.dbg vgettimeofday-64.o +targets += $(obj-vdso64) vdso64.so.dbg vgettimeofday-64.o vgetrandom-64.o obj-vdso64 := $(addprefix $(obj)/, $(obj-vdso64)) -ccflags-y := -fno-common -fno-builtin +ccflags-y := -fno-common -fno-builtin -DBUILD_VDSO ccflags-y += $(DISABLE_LATENT_ENTROPY_PLUGIN) ccflags-y += $(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector) ccflags-y += -DDISABLE_BRANCH_PROFILING @@ -72,7 +73,7 @@ CPPFLAGS_vdso64.lds += -P -C # link rule for the .so file, .lds has to be first $(obj)/vdso32.so.dbg: $(obj)/vdso32.lds $(obj-vdso32) $(obj)/vgettimeofday-32.o $(obj)/vgetrandom-32.o $(obj)/crtsavres-32.o FORCE $(call if_changed,vdso32ld_and_check) -$(obj)/vdso64.so.dbg: $(obj)/vdso64.lds $(obj-vdso64) $(obj)/vgettimeofday-64.o FORCE +$(obj)/vdso64.so.dbg: $(obj)/vdso64.lds $(obj-vdso64) $(obj)/vgettimeofday-64.o $(obj)/vgetrandom-64.o FORCE $(call if_changed,vdso64ld_and_check) # assembly rules for the .S files @@ -88,6 +89,8 @@ $(obj-vdso64): %-64.o: %.S FORCE $(call if_changed_dep,vdso64as) $(obj)/vgettimeofday-64.o: %-64.o: %.c FORCE $(call if_changed_dep,cc_o_c) +$(obj)/vgetrandom-64.o: %-64.o: %.c FORCE + $(call if_changed_dep,cc_o_c) # Generate VDSO offsets using helper script gen-vdso32sym := $(src)/gen_vdso32_offsets.sh diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/getrandom.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/getrandom.S index 7db51c0635a5..a957cd2b2b03 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/getrandom.S +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/getrandom.S @@ -5,8 +5,6 @@ * * Copyright (C) 2024 Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>, CS GROUP France */ -#include <linux/errno.h> - #include <asm/processor.h> #include <asm/ppc_asm.h> #include <asm/vdso.h> @@ -29,10 +27,18 @@ .cfi_adjust_cfa_offset PPC_MIN_STKFRM PPC_STL r0, PPC_MIN_STKFRM + PPC_LR_STKOFF(r1) .cfi_rel_offset lr, PPC_MIN_STKFRM + PPC_LR_STKOFF +#ifdef __powerpc64__ + PPC_STL r2, PPC_MIN_STKFRM + STK_GOT(r1) + .cfi_rel_offset r2, PPC_MIN_STKFRM + STK_GOT +#endif get_datapage r8 addi r8, r8, VDSO_RNG_DATA_OFFSET bl CFUNC(DOTSYM(\funct)) PPC_LL r0, PPC_MIN_STKFRM + PPC_LR_STKOFF(r1) +#ifdef __powerpc64__ + PPC_LL r2, PPC_MIN_STKFRM + STK_GOT(r1) + .cfi_restore r2 +#endif cmpwi r3, 0 mtlr r0 addi r1, r1, 2 * PPC_MIN_STKFRM @@ -48,11 +54,5 @@ .text V_FUNCTION_BEGIN(__kernel_getrandom) -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64 - li r3, ENOSYS - crset so - blr -#else cvdso_call __c_kernel_getrandom -#endif V_FUNCTION_END(__kernel_getrandom) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom-chacha.S b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom-chacha.S index 17a2f586223a..6b334bcef017 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom-chacha.S +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom-chacha.S @@ -80,14 +80,58 @@ */ SYM_FUNC_START(__arch_chacha20_blocks_nostack) #ifdef __powerpc64__ - blr + std r5, -216(r1) + + std r14, -144(r1) + std r15, -136(r1) + std r16, -128(r1) + std r17, -120(r1) + std r18, -112(r1) + std r19, -104(r1) + std r20, -96(r1) + std r21, -88(r1) + std r22, -80(r1) + std r23, -72(r1) + std r24, -64(r1) + std r25, -56(r1) + std r26, -48(r1) + std r27, -40(r1) + std r28, -32(r1) + std r29, -24(r1) + std r30, -16(r1) + std r31, -8(r1) #else stwu r1, -96(r1) stw r5, 20(r1) +#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ stmw r14, 24(r1) +#else + stw r14, 24(r1) + stw r15, 28(r1) + stw r16, 32(r1) + stw r17, 36(r1) + stw r18, 40(r1) + stw r19, 44(r1) + stw r20, 48(r1) + stw r21, 52(r1) + stw r22, 56(r1) + stw r23, 60(r1) + stw r24, 64(r1) + stw r25, 68(r1) + stw r26, 72(r1) + stw r27, 76(r1) + stw r28, 80(r1) + stw r29, 84(r1) + stw r30, 88(r1) + stw r31, 92(r1) +#endif +#endif lwz r14, 0(r5) lwz r15, 4(r5) +#ifdef __powerpc64__ + rldimi r14, r15, 32, 0 +#endif mr r0, r6 subi r3, r3, 4 @@ -156,6 +200,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(__arch_chacha20_blocks_nostack) add r28, r28, r14 add r29, r29, r15 +#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ stwbrx r16, r4, r3 addi r3, r3, 8 stwbrx r17, 0, r3 @@ -180,15 +225,42 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(__arch_chacha20_blocks_nostack) stwbrx r30, r4, r3 addi r3, r3, 8 stwbrx r31, 0, r3 +#else + stw r16, 4(r3) + stw r17, 8(r3) + stw r18, 12(r3) + stw r19, 16(r3) + stw r20, 20(r3) + stw r21, 24(r3) + stw r22, 28(r3) + stw r23, 32(r3) + stw r24, 36(r3) + stw r25, 40(r3) + stw r26, 44(r3) + stw r27, 48(r3) + stw r28, 52(r3) + stw r29, 56(r3) + stw r30, 60(r3) + stwu r31, 64(r3) +#endif subic. r0, r0, 1 /* subi. can't use r0 as source */ +#ifdef __powerpc64__ + addi r14, r14, 1 + srdi r15, r14, 32 +#else addic r14, r14, 1 addze r15, r15 +#endif bne .Lblock +#ifdef __powerpc64__ + ld r5, -216(r1) +#else lwz r5, 20(r1) +#endif stw r14, 0(r5) stw r15, 4(r5) @@ -200,8 +272,49 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(__arch_chacha20_blocks_nostack) li r11, 0 li r12, 0 +#ifdef __powerpc64__ + ld r14, -144(r1) + ld r15, -136(r1) + ld r16, -128(r1) + ld r17, -120(r1) + ld r18, -112(r1) + ld r19, -104(r1) + ld r20, -96(r1) + ld r21, -88(r1) + ld r22, -80(r1) + ld r23, -72(r1) + ld r24, -64(r1) + ld r25, -56(r1) + ld r26, -48(r1) + ld r27, -40(r1) + ld r28, -32(r1) + ld r29, -24(r1) + ld r30, -16(r1) + ld r31, -8(r1) +#else +#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ lmw r14, 24(r1) +#else + lwz r14, 24(r1) + lwz r15, 28(r1) + lwz r16, 32(r1) + lwz r17, 36(r1) + lwz r18, 40(r1) + lwz r19, 44(r1) + lwz r20, 48(r1) + lwz r21, 52(r1) + lwz r22, 56(r1) + lwz r23, 60(r1) + lwz r24, 64(r1) + lwz r25, 68(r1) + lwz r26, 72(r1) + lwz r27, 76(r1) + lwz r28, 80(r1) + lwz r29, 84(r1) + lwz r30, 88(r1) + lwz r31, 92(r1) +#endif addi r1, r1, 96 - blr #endif + blr SYM_FUNC_END(__arch_chacha20_blocks_nostack) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom.c index 923330845b2c..5f855d45fb7b 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom.c @@ -7,10 +7,8 @@ #include <linux/time.h> #include <linux/types.h> -#ifndef CONFIG_PPC64 ssize_t __c_kernel_getrandom(void *buffer, size_t len, unsigned int flags, void *opaque_state, size_t opaque_len, const struct vdso_rng_data *vd) { return __cvdso_getrandom_data(vd, buffer, len, flags, opaque_state, opaque_len); } -#endif
Extend getrandom() vDSO implementation to powerpc64. Tested on QEMU on both ppc64_defconfig and ppc64le_defconfig. The results are not precise as it is QEMU on an x86 laptop, but no need to be precise to see the benefit. ~ # ./vdso_test_getrandom bench-single vdso: 25000000 times in 4.977777162 seconds libc: 25000000 times in 75.516749981 seconds syscall: 25000000 times in 86.842242014 seconds ~ # ./vdso_test_getrandom bench-single vdso: 25000000 times in 6.473814156 seconds libc: 25000000 times in 73.875109463 seconds syscall: 25000000 times in 71.805066229 seconds Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> --- v4: - Use __BIG_ENDIAN__ which is defined by GCC instead of CONFIG_CPU_BIG_ENDIAN which is unknown by selftests - Implement a cleaner/smaller output copy for little endian instead of keeping compat macro. v3: New (split out of previous patch) --- arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 2 +- arch/powerpc/include/asm/mman.h | 2 +- arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/Makefile | 11 +- arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/getrandom.S | 16 +-- arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom-chacha.S | 117 ++++++++++++++++++- arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso/vgetrandom.c | 2 - 6 files changed, 132 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)