linux-kernel - [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/18] rcu: Do a single rhp->func read in rcu_head_after_call

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: <20190326231314.19518-13-paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:13:09 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     rcu@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
        jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
        josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
        fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
        Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@...eaurora.org>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 13/18] rcu: Do a single rhp->func read in rcu_head_after_call_rcu()

From: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@...eaurora.org>

The rcu_head_after_call_rcu() function reads the rhp->func pointer twice,
which can result in a false-positive WARN_ON_ONCE() if the callback
were passed to call_rcu() between the two reads.  Although racing
rcu_head_after_call_rcu() with call_rcu() is to be a dubious use case
(the return value is not reliable in that case), intermittent and
irreproducible warnings are also quite dubious.  This commit therefore
uses a single READ_ONCE() to pick up the value of rhp->func once, then
tests that value twice, thus guaranteeing consistent processing within
rcu_head_after_call_rcu()().

Neverthless, racing rcu_head_after_call_rcu() with call_rcu() is still
a dubious use case.

Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@...eaurora.org>
[ paulmck: Add blank line after declaration per checkpatch.pl. ]
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
---
 include/linux/rcupdate.h | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 6cdb1db776cf..922bb6848813 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -878,9 +878,11 @@ static inline void rcu_head_init(struct rcu_head *rhp)
 static inline bool
 rcu_head_after_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *rhp, rcu_callback_t f)
 {
-	if (READ_ONCE(rhp->func) == f)
+	rcu_callback_t func = READ_ONCE(rhp->func);
+
+	if (func == f)
 		return true;
-	WARN_ON_ONCE(READ_ONCE(rhp->func) != (rcu_callback_t)~0L);
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(func != (rcu_callback_t)~0L);
 	return false;
 }
 
-- 
2.17.1