linux-kernel - [Patch v3] mm/vmscan: fix unsequenced modification and access warning

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: <20170510154030.10720-1-nick.desaulniers@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 May 2017 08:40:30 -0700
From:   Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers@...il.com>
To:     unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net, mhocko@...e.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
        minchan@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers@...il.com>
Subject: [Patch v3] mm/vmscan: fix unsequenced modification and access warning

Clang and its -Wunsequenced emits a warning

mm/vmscan.c:2961:25: error: unsequenced modification and access to
'gfp_mask' [-Wunsequenced]
                .gfp_mask = (gfp_mask = current_gfp_context(gfp_mask)),
                                      ^

While it is not clear to me whether the initialization code violates the
specification (6.7.8 par 19 (ISO/IEC 9899) looks like it disagrees) the
code is quite confusing and worth cleaning up anyway. Fix this by
reusing sc.gfp_mask rather than the updated input gfp_mask parameter.

Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers@...il.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
---
Changes in v3:
- changed commit message
- added previous ack

Will file a bug with llvm later today

 mm/vmscan.c | 13 ++++++-------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 4e7ed65842af..d32c42d17935 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -2958,7 +2958,7 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist, int order,
 	unsigned long nr_reclaimed;
 	struct scan_control sc = {
 		.nr_to_reclaim = SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX,
-		.gfp_mask = (gfp_mask = current_gfp_context(gfp_mask)),
+		.gfp_mask = current_gfp_context(gfp_mask),
 		.reclaim_idx = gfp_zone(gfp_mask),
 		.order = order,
 		.nodemask = nodemask,
@@ -2973,12 +2973,12 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist, int order,
 	 * 1 is returned so that the page allocator does not OOM kill at this
 	 * point.
 	 */
-	if (throttle_direct_reclaim(gfp_mask, zonelist, nodemask))
+	if (throttle_direct_reclaim(sc.gfp_mask, zonelist, nodemask))
 		return 1;
 
 	trace_mm_vmscan_direct_reclaim_begin(order,
 				sc.may_writepage,
-				gfp_mask,
+				sc.gfp_mask,
 				sc.reclaim_idx);
 
 	nr_reclaimed = do_try_to_free_pages(zonelist, &sc);
@@ -3763,16 +3763,15 @@ static int __node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned in
 	const unsigned long nr_pages = 1 << order;
 	struct task_struct *p = current;
 	struct reclaim_state reclaim_state;
-	int classzone_idx = gfp_zone(gfp_mask);
 	struct scan_control sc = {
 		.nr_to_reclaim = max(nr_pages, SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX),
-		.gfp_mask = (gfp_mask = current_gfp_context(gfp_mask)),
+		.gfp_mask = current_gfp_context(gfp_mask),
 		.order = order,
 		.priority = NODE_RECLAIM_PRIORITY,
 		.may_writepage = !!(node_reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_WRITE),
 		.may_unmap = !!(node_reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_UNMAP),
 		.may_swap = 1,
-		.reclaim_idx = classzone_idx,
+		.reclaim_idx = gfp_zone(gfp_mask),
 	};
 
 	cond_resched();
@@ -3782,7 +3781,7 @@ static int __node_reclaim(struct pglist_data *pgdat, gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned in
 	 * and RECLAIM_UNMAP.
 	 */
 	p->flags |= PF_MEMALLOC | PF_SWAPWRITE;
-	lockdep_set_current_reclaim_state(gfp_mask);
+	lockdep_set_current_reclaim_state(sc.gfp_mask);
 	reclaim_state.reclaimed_slab = 0;
 	p->reclaim_state = &reclaim_state;
 
-- 
2.11.0