linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.2 098/413] rcu: Force inlining of rcu_read

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: <20190724191742.121503213@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 24 Jul 2019 21:16:29 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.2 098/413] rcu: Force inlining of rcu_read_lock()

[ Upstream commit 6da9f775175e516fc7229ceaa9b54f8f56aa7924 ]

When debugging options are turned on, the rcu_read_lock() function
might not be inlined. This results in lockdep's print_lock() function
printing "rcu_read_lock+0x0/0x70" instead of rcu_read_lock()'s caller.
For example:

[   10.579995] =============================
[   10.584033] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[   10.588074] 4.18.0.memcg_v2+ #1 Not tainted
[   10.593162] -----------------------------
[   10.597203] include/linux/rcupdate.h:281 Illegal context switch in
RCU read-side critical section!
[   10.606220]
[   10.606220] other info that might help us debug this:
[   10.606220]
[   10.614280]
[   10.614280] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
[   10.620853] 3 locks held by systemd/1:
[   10.624632]  #0: (____ptrval____) (&type->i_mutex_dir_key#5){.+.+}, at: lookup_slow+0x42/0x70
[   10.633232]  #1: (____ptrval____) (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: rcu_read_lock+0x0/0x70
[   10.640954]  #2: (____ptrval____) (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: rcu_read_lock+0x0/0x70

These "rcu_read_lock+0x0/0x70" strings are not providing any useful
information.  This commit therefore forces inlining of the rcu_read_lock()
function so that rcu_read_lock()'s caller is instead shown.

Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 include/linux/rcupdate.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index b25d20822e75..3508f4508a11 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -586,7 +586,7 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void) { }
  * read-side critical sections may be preempted and they may also block, but
  * only when acquiring spinlocks that are subject to priority inheritance.
  */
-static inline void rcu_read_lock(void)
+static __always_inline void rcu_read_lock(void)
 {
 	__rcu_read_lock();
 	__acquire(RCU);
-- 
2.20.1