[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3b070057-5fda-410e-a047-d9061d56a82f@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 12:47:43 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>,
Chris Li <sparse@...isli.org>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Frederic Weisbecker
<frederic@...nel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, Justin Stitt
<justinstitt@...gle.com>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@...data.co.jp>,
Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>, Mark Rutland
<mark.rutland@....com>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev, rcu@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/36] bit_spinlock: Support Clang's context analysis
On 12/19/25 7:40 AM, Marco Elver wrote:
> +/*
> + * For static context analysis, we need a unique token for each possible bit
> + * that can be used as a bit_spinlock. The easiest way to do that is to create a
> + * fake context that we can cast to with the __bitlock(bitnum, addr) macro
> + * below, which will give us unique instances for each (bit, addr) pair that the
> + * static analysis can use.
> + */
> +context_lock_struct(__context_bitlock) { };
> +#define __bitlock(bitnum, addr) (struct __context_bitlock *)(bitnum + (addr))
Will this cause static analyzers to complain about out-of-bounds
accesses for (bitnum + (addr)), which is equivalent to &(addr)[bitnum]?
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists