compiler.h: fix barrier_data() on clang

stable inclusion
from linux-4.19.164
commit b207caff4176e3a6ba273243da2db2e595e4aad2
CVE: CVE-2021-0938

--------------------------------

commit 3347acc6 upstream.

Commit 815f0ddb ("include/linux/compiler*.h: make compiler-*.h
mutually exclusive") neglected to copy barrier_data() from
compiler-gcc.h into compiler-clang.h.

The definition in compiler-gcc.h was really to work around clang's more
aggressive optimization, so this broke barrier_data() on clang, and
consequently memzero_explicit() as well.

For example, this results in at least the memzero_explicit() call in
lib/crypto/sha256.c:sha256_transform() being optimized away by clang.

Fix this by moving the definition of barrier_data() into compiler.h.

Also move the gcc/clang definition of barrier() into compiler.h,
__memory_barrier() is icc-specific (and barrier() is already defined
using it in compiler-intel.h) and doesn't belong in compiler.h.

[rdunlap@infradead.org: fix ALPHA builds when SMP is not enabled]

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201101231835.4589-1-rdunlap@infradead.org
Fixes: 815f0ddb ("include/linux/compiler*.h: make compiler-*.h mutually exclusive")
Signed-off-by: NArvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: NRandy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Tested-by: NNick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Reviewed-by: NNick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Reviewed-by: NKees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201014212631.207844-1-nivedita@alum.mit.eduSigned-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
[nd: backport to account for missing
  commit e506ea45 ("compiler.h: Split {READ,WRITE}_ONCE definitions out into rwonce.h")
  commit d08b9f0c ("scs: Add support for Clang's Shadow Call Stack (SCS)")
  commit a3f8a30f ("Compiler Attributes: use feature checks instead of version checks")]
Signed-off-by: NNick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Signed-off-by: NGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NYang Yingliang <yangyingliang@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: NCheng Jian <cj.chengjian@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: NXiu Jianfeng <xiujianfeng@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: NYang Yingliang <yangyingliang@huawei.com>

include/linux/compiler-clang.h

@@ -39,7 +39,6 @@
  * and may be redefined here because they should not be shared with other
  * compilers, like ICC.
  */
-#define barrier() __asm__ __volatile__("" : : : "memory")
 #define __must_be_array(a) BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(__same_type((a), &(a)[0]))
 #define __assume_aligned(a, ...)	\
 	__attribute__((__assume_aligned__(a, ## __VA_ARGS__)))

include/linux/compiler-gcc.h

@@ -14,25 +14,6 @@
 # error Sorry, your compiler is too old - please upgrade it.
 #endif
 
-/* Optimization barrier */
-
-/* The "volatile" is due to gcc bugs */
-#define barrier() __asm__ __volatile__("": : :"memory")
-/*
- * This version is i.e. to prevent dead stores elimination on @ptr
- * where gcc and llvm may behave differently when otherwise using
- * normal barrier(): while gcc behavior gets along with a normal
- * barrier(), llvm needs an explicit input variable to be assumed
- * clobbered. The issue is as follows: while the inline asm might
- * access any memory it wants, the compiler could have fit all of
- * @ptr into memory registers instead, and since @ptr never escaped
- * from that, it proved that the inline asm wasn't touching any of
- * it. This version works well with both compilers, i.e. we're telling
- * the compiler that the inline asm absolutely may see the contents
- * of @ptr. See also: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15495
- */
-#define barrier_data(ptr) __asm__ __volatile__("": :"r"(ptr) :"memory")
-
 /*
  * This macro obfuscates arithmetic on a variable address so that gcc
  * shouldn't recognize the original var, and make assumptions about it.

include/linux/compiler.h

@@ -79,11 +79,25 @@ void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_likely_data *f, int val,
 
 /* Optimization barrier */
 #ifndef barrier
-# define barrier() __memory_barrier()
+/* The "volatile" is due to gcc bugs */
+# define barrier() __asm__ __volatile__("": : :"memory")
 #endif
 
 #ifndef barrier_data
-# define barrier_data(ptr) barrier()
+/*
+ * This version is i.e. to prevent dead stores elimination on @ptr
+ * where gcc and llvm may behave differently when otherwise using
+ * normal barrier(): while gcc behavior gets along with a normal
+ * barrier(), llvm needs an explicit input variable to be assumed
+ * clobbered. The issue is as follows: while the inline asm might
+ * access any memory it wants, the compiler could have fit all of
+ * @ptr into memory registers instead, and since @ptr never escaped
+ * from that, it proved that the inline asm wasn't touching any of
+ * it. This version works well with both compilers, i.e. we're telling
+ * the compiler that the inline asm absolutely may see the contents
+ * of @ptr. See also: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15495
+ */
+# define barrier_data(ptr) __asm__ __volatile__("": :"r"(ptr) :"memory")
 #endif
 
 /* workaround for GCC PR82365 if needed */