linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/4] srcu: Add READ_ONCE() to srcu_struct ->srcu_gp

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]

Date:   Tue, 18 Feb 2020 12:43:34 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc:     rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...com, mingo@...nel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
        dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com,
        edumazet@...gle.com, fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com,
        joel@...lfernandes.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/4] srcu: Add READ_ONCE() to srcu_struct
 ->srcu_gp_seq load

On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 10:32:20AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 01:45:07PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 04:29:32PM -0800, paulmck@...nel.org wrote:
> > > From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
> > > 
> > > The load of the srcu_struct structure's ->srcu_gp_seq field in
> > > srcu_funnel_gp_start() is lockless, so this commit adds the requisite
> > > READ_ONCE().
> > > 
> > > This data race was reported by KCSAN.
> > 
> > But is there in actual fact a data-race? AFAICT this code was just fine.
> 
> Now that you mention it, the lock is held at that point, isn't it?  So if
> that READ_ONCE() actually does anything, there is a bug somewhere else.
> 
> Good catch, I will drop this patch, thank you!

Well, I didn't get further than the Changelog fails to describe an
actual problem and it looks like compare-against-a-constant.

(worse, it masks off everything but the 2 lowest bits, so even if there
was a problem with load-tearing, it still wouldn't matter)

I'm not going to argue with you if you want to use READ_ONCE() vs
data_race() and a comment to denote false-positive KCSAN warnings, but I
do feel somewhat strongly that the Changelog should describe the actual
problem -- if there is one -- or just flat out state that this is to
make KCSAN shut up but the code is fine.

That is; every KCSAN report should be analysed, right? All I'm asking is
for that analysis to end up in the Changelog.

> > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> > > ---
> > >  kernel/rcu/srcutree.c | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> > > index 119a373..90ab475 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> > > @@ -678,7 +678,7 @@ static void srcu_funnel_gp_start(struct srcu_struct *ssp, struct srcu_data *sdp,
> > >  
> > >  	/* If grace period not already done and none in progress, start it. */
> > >  	if (!rcu_seq_done(&ssp->srcu_gp_seq, s) &&
> > > -	    rcu_seq_state(ssp->srcu_gp_seq) == SRCU_STATE_IDLE) {
> > > +	    rcu_seq_state(READ_ONCE(ssp->srcu_gp_seq)) == SRCU_STATE_IDLE) {
> > >  		WARN_ON_ONCE(ULONG_CMP_GE(ssp->srcu_gp_seq, ssp->srcu_gp_seq_needed));
> > >  		srcu_gp_start(ssp);
> > >  		if (likely(srcu_init_done))
> > > -- 
> > > 2.9.5
> > >