[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170927162551.GA85447@debian>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 12:25:51 -0400
From: Tim Hansen <devtimhansen@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/ipv4: Update sk_for_each_entry_offset_rcu macro to
utilize rcu methods hlist_next_rcu. This fixes the warnings thrown by sparse
regarding net/ipv4/udp.c on line 1974.
> Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 08:03:39PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Tim Hansen <devtimhansen@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 20:54:05 -0400
>
> > Signed-off-by: Tim Hansen <devtimhansen@...il.com>
>
> This is a poor patch submission on many levels.
>
Apologies Dave, this is my first patch. I appreciate the quick review and helpful feedback.
> But the main problem, is that there is no use of
> sk_for_each_entry_offset_rcu() in any of my networking kernel trees.
>
Using the get_maintainers.pl on include/net/sock.h brings up your name and the netdev mailing list. Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding what you mean by this?
> Referencing code by line number never works, you have to mention
> what version of the kernel, what tree, and where in what fucntion
> the problem is occurring.
>
I am using your tree net tree for now: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net.git on HEAD. HEAD is c2cc187e53011c1c4931055984657da9085c763b for me currently on your tree.
Before I was on the 4.13 tag pulled from linus' tree.
The line number is indeed useless in hindsight since there are many different trees. I won't do that again.
Using sparse 0.5.0 on HEAD of your net tree, I run make C=1 net/ipv4/. It throws the error:
"net/ipv4/udp.c:1981:9: error: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces)
net/ipv4/udp.c:1981:9: error: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces)"
This points to the function sk_for_each_entry_offset_rcu() in __udp4_lib_mcast_deliver in net/ipv4/udp.c.
Inspecting this macro in include/net/sock.h is what lead to this patch.
Applying the patch silences those warnings but clearly this is -not- a proper way of fixing the error. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.
> Secondly, sk_for_each_entry_offset_rcu() is not meant to be used
> in _raw() contexts. This is why it's not called
> sk_for_each_entry_offset_rcu_raw().
Absolutely makes sense. I am not familar with the kernel naming standards fully yet but this is obvious in hindsight.
>
> The sparse warning is probably legitimate, and points to a bug.
>
> But nobody can tell where becuase you haven't told us what tree
> and where this happens.
Hopefully my reply has enough detail for reproduction and further debugging. Please let me know if I should supply any additional information.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists