Re: [PATCH v2 next 2/4] lib: mul_u64_u64_div_u64() Use BUG_ON() for divide by zero

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Sun, 18 May 2025, David Laight wrote:

> Do an explicit BUG_ON(!divisor) instead of hoping the 'undefined
> behaviour' the compiler generated for a compile-time 1/0 is in any
> way useful.
> 
> It may be better to define the function to return ~(u64)0 for
> divide by zero.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 
> A new change for v2 of the patchset.
> Whereas gcc inserts (IIRC) 'ud2' clang is likely to let the code
> continue and generate 'random' results for any 'undefined bahaviour'.

clang does exactly the same as gcc.

As mentioned earlier, this is a soft NAK from me.

The above explanation is more speculation than fact. And here we really
want to duplicate the behavior a regular runtime 32-bit by 32-bit x/0
would produce, or in other words behave just like div64_u64() for that
matter.

>  lib/math/div64.c | 10 +++-------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/math/div64.c b/lib/math/div64.c
> index a5c966a36836..c426fa0660bc 100644
> --- a/lib/math/div64.c
> +++ b/lib/math/div64.c
> @@ -186,6 +186,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(iter_div_u64_rem);
>  #ifndef mul_u64_u64_div_u64
>  u64 mul_u64_u64_div_u64(u64 a, u64 b, u64 d)
>  {
> +	/* Trigger exception if divisor is zero */
> +	BUG_ON(!d);
> +
>  	if (ilog2(a) + ilog2(b) <= 62)
>  		return div64_u64(a * b, d);
>  
> @@ -212,13 +215,6 @@ u64 mul_u64_u64_div_u64(u64 a, u64 b, u64 d)
>  
>  #endif
>  
> -	/* make sure d is not zero, trigger exception otherwise */
> -#pragma GCC diagnostic push
> -#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wdiv-by-zero"
> -	if (unlikely(d == 0))
> -		return 1/0;
> -#pragma GCC diagnostic pop
> -
>  	int shift = __builtin_ctzll(d);
>  
>  	/* try reducing the fraction in case the dividend becomes <= 64 bits */
> -- 
> 2.39.5
> 
>