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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 08:40:55 +0800 From: Nicolas Iooss <nicolas.iooss_linux@....org> To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> CC: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: declare rcu_data variables in the section they are defined in On 05/05/2015 04:33 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sun, May 03, 2015 at 12:27:02PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: >> On Sun, May 03, 2015 at 05:57:53PM +0800, Nicolas Iooss wrote: >>> Commit 11bbb235c26f ("rcu: Use DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED for >>> rcu_data") replaced DEFINE_PER_CPU by DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED in >>> the definition of rcu_sched and rcu_bh without updating >>> kernel/rcu/tree.h. >>> >>> This makes clang report a section mismatch (-Wsection warning) when >>> building LLVMLinux because the variables are declared in .data..percpu >>> but defined in .data..percpu..shared_aligned. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Iooss <nicolas.iooss_linux@....org> >> >> Good catch. >> Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> > > Agreed, good catch! But don't we also need to worry about > rcu_preempt_data? Yes, I missed it because I didn't know that allyesconfig/allmodconfig does not select CONFIG_PREEMPT (it selects CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE instead). > Also, given that tree_trace.c now uses iterators > rather than direct access via the per-CPU variables, wouldn't the > following be more appropriate? (-Very- lightly tested.) This doesn't work with CONFIG_TREE_RCU_TRACE, because kernel/rcu/tree_trace.c uses rcu_preempt_state (in v4.1-rc2). I've successfully built an allmodconfig+CONFIG_PREEMPT kernel for x86_64 with the following patch (I have not tested the result). Anyway, thanks for your quick replies. Nicolas --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ static const char *tp_##sname##_varname __used __tracepoint_string = sname##_var #define RCU_STATE_INITIALIZER(sname, sabbr, cr) \ DEFINE_RCU_TPS(sname) \ -DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED(struct rcu_data, sname##_data); \ +static DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED(struct rcu_data, sname##_data); \ struct rcu_state sname##_state = { \ .level = { &sname##_state.node[0] }, \ .rda = &sname##_data, \ --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h @@ -519,14 +519,11 @@ extern struct list_head rcu_struct_flavors; * RCU implementation internal declarations: */ extern struct rcu_state rcu_sched_state; -DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct rcu_data, rcu_sched_data); extern struct rcu_state rcu_bh_state; -DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct rcu_data, rcu_bh_data); #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU extern struct rcu_state rcu_preempt_state; -DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct rcu_data, rcu_preempt_data); #endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU */ #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_BOOST -- 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