linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v14 049/138] mm/memcg: Add folio_lruvec_relock_irq() and folio_lruvec_relock

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: <20210729083644.GD3809@techsingularity.net>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jul 2021 09:36:44 +0100
From:   Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To:     "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 049/138] mm/memcg: Add folio_lruvec_relock_irq() and
 folio_lruvec_relock_irqsave()

On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 04:35:35AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> These are the folio equivalents of relock_page_lruvec_irq() and
> folio_lruvec_relock_irqsave().  Also convert page_matches_lruvec()
> to folio_matches_lruvec().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@...radead.org>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>

When build testing what you had in your for-next branch, I got a new
warning for powerpc defconfig

 In file included from ./include/linux/mmzone.h:8,
                  from ./include/linux/gfp.h:6,
                  from ./include/linux/mm.h:10,
                  from mm/swap.c:17:
 mm/swap.c: In function 'release_pages':
 ./include/linux/spinlock.h:290:3: warning: 'flags' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
   290 |   _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags); \
       |   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 mm/swap.c:906:16: note: 'flags' was declared here
   906 |  unsigned long flags;
       |                ^~~~~

I'm fairly sure it's a false positive and the compiler just cannot figure
out that flags are only accessed when lruvec is !NULL and once lruvec is
!NULL, flags are valid

diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
index 6f382abeccf9..96a23af8d1c7 100644
--- a/mm/swap.c
+++ b/mm/swap.c
@@ -903,7 +903,7 @@ void release_pages(struct page **pages, int nr)
 	int i;
 	LIST_HEAD(pages_to_free);
 	struct lruvec *lruvec = NULL;
-	unsigned long flags;
+	unsigned long flags = 0;
 	unsigned int lock_batch;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {