linux-kernel - [PATCH tip/core/rcu] rcu: make rcu_read_lock_bh

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100316000343.GA25857@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:03:43 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca,
	josh@...htriplett.org, dvhltc@...ibm.com, niv@...ibm.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com, arnd@...db.de
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu] rcu: make rcu_read_lock_bh_held() allow for
	disabled BH

Disabling BH can stand in for rcu_read_lock_bh(), and this patch updates
rcu_read_lock_bh_held() to allow for this.  In order to avoid include-file
hell, this function is moved out of line to kernel/rcupdate.c.

Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Reported-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 include/linux/rcupdate.h |   19 ++++---------------
 kernel/rcupdate.c        |   23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 3024050..e1bdc4b 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -123,22 +123,11 @@ static inline int rcu_read_lock_held(void)
 	return lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map);
 }
 
-/**
- * rcu_read_lock_bh_held - might we be in RCU-bh read-side critical section?
- *
- * If CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING is selected and enabled, returns nonzero iff in
- * an RCU-bh read-side critical section.  In absence of CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING,
- * this assumes we are in an RCU-bh read-side critical section unless it can
- * prove otherwise.
- *
- * Check rcu_scheduler_active to prevent false positives during boot.
+/*
+ * rcu_read_lock_bh_held() is defined out of line to avoid #include-file
+ * hell.
  */
-static inline int rcu_read_lock_bh_held(void)
-{
-	if (!debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled())
-		return 1;
-	return lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map);
-}
+extern int rcu_read_lock_bh_held(void);
 
 /**
  * rcu_read_lock_sched_held - might we be in RCU-sched read-side critical section?
diff --git a/kernel/rcupdate.c b/kernel/rcupdate.c
index f1125c1..63fe254 100644
--- a/kernel/rcupdate.c
+++ b/kernel/rcupdate.c
@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
 #include <linux/kernel_stat.h>
+#include <linux/hardirq.h>
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
 static struct lock_class_key rcu_lock_key;
@@ -66,6 +67,28 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_sched_lock_map);
 int rcu_scheduler_active __read_mostly;
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_scheduler_active);
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
+
+/**
+ * rcu_read_lock_bh_held - might we be in RCU-bh read-side critical section?
+ *
+ * Check for bottom half being disabled, which covers both the
+ * CONFIG_PROVE_RCU and not cases.  Note that if someone uses
+ * rcu_read_lock_bh(), but then later enables BH, lockdep (if enabled)
+ * will show the situation.
+ *
+ * Check debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled() to prevent false positives during boot.
+ */
+int rcu_read_lock_bh_held(void)
+{
+	if (!debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled())
+		return 1;
+	return in_softirq();
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_read_lock_bh_held);
+
+#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC */
+
 /*
  * This function is invoked towards the end of the scheduler's initialization
  * process.  Before this is called, the idle task might contain
-- 
1.6.6

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/