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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150921193045.GA13674@lerouge>
Date:	Mon, 21 Sep 2015 21:30:49 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, LKP <lkp@...org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [rcu] kernel BUG at include/linux/pagemap.h:149!

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 10:19:47AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH 01/27] rcu: Don't disable preemption for Tiny and Tree RCU
>  readers
> 
> Because preempt_disable() maps to barrier() for non-debug builds,
> it forces the compiler to spill and reload registers.  Because Tree
> RCU and Tiny RCU now only appear in CONFIG_PREEMPT=n builds, these
> barrier() instances generate needless extra code for each instance of
> rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock().  This extra code slows down Tree
> RCU and bloats Tiny RCU.
> 
> This commit therefore removes the preempt_disable() and preempt_enable()
> from the non-preemptible implementations of __rcu_read_lock() and
> __rcu_read_unlock(), respectively.
> 
> For debug purposes, preempt_disable() and preempt_enable() are still
> kept if CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT=y, which makes the detection of sleeping
> inside atomic sections still work in non-preemptible kernels.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/rcupdate.h | 6 ++++--
>  include/linux/rcutiny.h  | 1 +
>  kernel/rcu/tree.c        | 9 +++++++++
>  3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> index d63bb77..6c3cece 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> @@ -297,12 +297,14 @@ void synchronize_rcu(void);
>  
>  static inline void __rcu_read_lock(void)
>  {
> -	preempt_disable();
> +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT))
> +		preempt_disable();

preempt_disable() is a no-op when !CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT, right?
Or rather it's a barrier(), which is anyway implied by rcu_read_lock().

So perhaps we can get rid of the IS_ENABLED() check?
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ