[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1281883637.2942.42.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 16:47:17 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: [GIT] Networking
Le dimanche 15 août 2010 à 12:55 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> We have one lock per cpu, and only one cpu can possibly lock its
> associated lock under softirq. So the usual lockdep check, warning a
> lock is taken with BH enabled, while same lock was taken inside softirq
> handler is triggering a false positive here.
>
> I believe no existing lockdep annotation can instruct lockdep this use
> is OK, I guess we have following choice :
>
> 1) Mask BH again, using xt_info_wrlock_lockdep(cpu) instead of
> xt_info_wrlock(cpu).
>
> xt_info_wrlock_lockdep() being a variant, that disables BH in case
> CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y
>
> 2) temporally switch off lockdep in get_counters(), using a
> lockdep_off()/lockdep_on() pair, and a comment why this is necessary.
>
In any case, here is patch implementing the later
CC Patrick, our netfilter maintainer...
Maybe lockdep rules could be improved to take care of this later ?
Thanks
[PATCH] netfilter: {ip,ip6,arp}_tables: avoid lockdep false positive
After commit 24b36f019 (netfilter: {ip,ip6,arp}_tables: dont block
bottom half more than necessary), lockdep can raise a warning
because we attempt to lock a spinlock with BH enabled, while
the same lock is usually locked by another cpu in a softirq context.
In this use case, the lockdep splat is a false positive, because
the BH disabling only matters for one cpu for a given lock
(we use one lock per cpu).
Use lockdep_off()/lockdep_on() around the problematic section to
avoid the splat.
Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Diagnosed-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
---
net/ipv4/netfilter/arp_tables.c | 3 +++
net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c | 3 +++
net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c | 3 +++
3 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/ipv4/netfilter/arp_tables.c b/net/ipv4/netfilter/arp_tables.c
index 6bccba3..b4f7ebf 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/arp_tables.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/arp_tables.c
@@ -729,8 +729,10 @@ static void get_counters(const struct xt_table_info *t,
local_bh_enable();
/* Processing counters from other cpus, we can let bottom half enabled,
* (preemption is disabled)
+ * We must turn off lockdep to avoid a false positive.
*/
+ lockdep_off();
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
if (cpu == curcpu)
continue;
@@ -743,6 +745,7 @@ static void get_counters(const struct xt_table_info *t,
}
xt_info_wrunlock(cpu);
}
+ lockdep_on();
put_cpu();
}
diff --git a/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c b/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c
index c439721..dc5b2fd 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_tables.c
@@ -903,8 +903,10 @@ get_counters(const struct xt_table_info *t,
local_bh_enable();
/* Processing counters from other cpus, we can let bottom half enabled,
* (preemption is disabled)
+ * We must turn off lockdep to avoid a false positive.
*/
+ lockdep_off();
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
if (cpu == curcpu)
continue;
@@ -917,6 +919,7 @@ get_counters(const struct xt_table_info *t,
}
xt_info_wrunlock(cpu);
}
+ lockdep_on();
put_cpu();
}
diff --git a/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c b/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c
index 5359ef4..fb55443 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c
@@ -916,8 +916,10 @@ get_counters(const struct xt_table_info *t,
local_bh_enable();
/* Processing counters from other cpus, we can let bottom half enabled,
* (preemption is disabled)
+ * We must turn off lockdep to avoid a false positive.
*/
+ lockdep_off();
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
if (cpu == curcpu)
continue;
@@ -930,6 +932,7 @@ get_counters(const struct xt_table_info *t,
}
xt_info_wrunlock(cpu);
}
+ lockdep_on();
put_cpu();
}
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists