linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 06/14] locking/mutex: Expose mutex

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANDhNCqL5GRm0m+pON0n7KD-n=zj1bidZ+m2cHsgDP5D8jZF8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 25 Apr 2023 15:53:47 +0100
From:   John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Qais Yousef <qyousef@...gle.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@...gle.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>,
        "Connor O'Brien" <connoro@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/14] locking/mutex: Expose mutex_owner()

On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 11:36 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 04:25:03AM +0000, John Stultz wrote:
>
> >  include/linux/mutex.h  | 2 ++
> >  kernel/locking/mutex.c | 5 +++++
> >  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/mutex.h b/include/linux/mutex.h
> > index 8f226d460f51..ebdc59cb0bf6 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/mutex.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/mutex.h
> > @@ -118,6 +118,8 @@ do {                                                                      \
> >  extern void __mutex_init(struct mutex *lock, const char *name,
> >                        struct lock_class_key *key);
> >
> > +extern struct task_struct *mutex_owner(struct mutex *lock);
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * mutex_is_locked - is the mutex locked
> >   * @lock: the mutex to be queried
> > diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> > index 45f1b7519f63..cbc34d5f4486 100644
> > --- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> > +++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> > @@ -81,6 +81,11 @@ static inline struct task_struct *__mutex_owner(struct mutex *lock)
> >       return (struct task_struct *)(atomic_long_read(&lock->owner) & ~MUTEX_FLAGS);
> >  }
> >
> > +struct task_struct *mutex_owner(struct mutex *lock)
> > +{
> > +     return __mutex_owner(lock);
> > +}
> > +
> >  static inline struct task_struct *__owner_task(unsigned long owner)
> >  {
> >       return (struct task_struct *)(owner & ~MUTEX_FLAGS);
>
>
> Urgh, no.
>
> It exposes mutex_owner() far wider than it should be, and also it turns
> what should be a simple load into a function call :/
>
> Looking at the lastest patches I have here this used to be an inline in
> kernel/locking/mutex.h and kernel/sched/core.c got to #include
> "../locking/mutex.h".

Sure. I'll rework it this way.

Thanks again for the feedback, and apologies for any frustration caused.
-john