-
Gao Xiang authored
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 59daa706 ("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@redhat.comSigned-off-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Nick Terrell <terrelln@fb.com> Cc: Yann Collet <yann.collet.73@gmail.com> Cc: Miao Xie <miaoxie@huawei.com> Cc: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> Cc: Li Guifu <bluce.liguifu@huawei.com> Cc: Guo Xuenan <guoxuenan@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
89b15863