[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1381354949.4971.20.camel@edumazet-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 14:42:29 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 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, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 07/13] ipv6/ip6_tunnel: Apply
rcu_access_pointer() to avoid sparse false positive
On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 14:29 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> 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 use in
> ip6_tnl_unlink() is legitimate: It 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: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
> Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>
> Cc: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
> Cc: Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
> Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
> ---
> net/ipv6/ip6_tunnel.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/ip6_tunnel.c b/net/ipv6/ip6_tunnel.c
> index 61355f7f4da5..ecc0166e1a9c 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/ip6_tunnel.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/ip6_tunnel.c
> @@ -245,7 +245,7 @@ ip6_tnl_unlink(struct ip6_tnl_net *ip6n, struct ip6_tnl *t)
> (iter = rtnl_dereference(*tp)) != NULL;
> tp = &iter->next) {
> if (t == iter) {
> - rcu_assign_pointer(*tp, t->next);
> + rcu_assign_pointer(*tp, rcu_access_pointer(t->next));
> break;
> }
> }
Then it seems a mere "*tp = t->next;" would be enough ?
We do not really need a barrier.
--
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