[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1380072916-31557-10-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 18:35:13 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
edumazet@...gle.com, darren@...art.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
sbw@....edu, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 10/13] mac80211: Apply rcu_access_pointer() to avoid sparse false positive
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
The sparse checking for rcu_assign_pointer() was recently upgraded
to reject non-__kernel address spaces. This also rejects __rcu,
which is almost always the right thing to do. However, the uses in
sta_info_hash_del() are legitimate: They is assigning a pointer to an
element from an RCU-protected list, and all elements of this list are
already visible to caller.
This commit therefore silences this false positive by laundering the
pointer using rcu_access_pointer() as suggested by Josh Triplett.
Reported-by: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
---
net/mac80211/sta_info.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/mac80211/sta_info.c b/net/mac80211/sta_info.c
index aeb967a..d18ab89 100644
--- a/net/mac80211/sta_info.c
+++ b/net/mac80211/sta_info.c
@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ static int sta_info_hash_del(struct ieee80211_local *local,
return -ENOENT;
if (s == sta) {
rcu_assign_pointer(local->sta_hash[STA_HASH(sta->sta.addr)],
- s->hnext);
+ rcu_access_pointer(s->hnext));
return 0;
}
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static int sta_info_hash_del(struct ieee80211_local *local,
s = rcu_dereference_protected(s->hnext,
lockdep_is_held(&local->sta_mtx));
if (rcu_access_pointer(s->hnext)) {
- rcu_assign_pointer(s->hnext, sta->hnext);
+ rcu_assign_pointer(s->hnext, rcu_access_pointer(sta->hnext));
return 0;
}
--
1.8.1.5
--
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