[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikPcIzd_gQ3XVT8zdy2Gyxibx3wx_twlaxJA3cz@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 00:28:15 -0400
From: Miles Lane <miles.lane@...il.com>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, nauman@...gle.com,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com>,
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Subject: Re: 2.6.35-rc2-git1 - lib/idr.c:605 invoked rcu_dereference_check()
without protection!
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Paul E. McKenney
<paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 02:23:17PM -0400, Miles Lane wrote:
>> [ 2.677955] [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
>> [ 2.679089] ---------------------------------------------------
>> [ 2.680276] lib/idr.c:605 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
>> [ 2.681499]
>> [ 2.681500] other info that might help us debug this:
>> [ 2.681501]
>> [ 2.685509]
>> [ 2.685510] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
>> [ 2.688221] 1 lock held by swapper/1:
>> [ 2.689587] #0: (mtd_table_mutex){+.+...}, at:
>> [<ffffffff812bea45>] register_mtd_user+0x1a/0x69
>> [ 2.691096]
>> [ 2.691098] stack backtrace:
>> [ 2.694059] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.35-rc2-git1 #8
>> [ 2.695601] Call Trace:
>> [ 2.697243] [<ffffffff81064e9c>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0x9d/0xa5
>> [ 2.698868] [<ffffffff811b9c86>] idr_get_next+0x60/0x124
>> [ 2.700556] [<ffffffff812be779>] __mtd_next_device+0x1b/0x1d
>> [ 2.702238] [<ffffffff812bea7c>] register_mtd_user+0x51/0x69
>> [ 2.703964] [<ffffffff816cca45>] init_mtdchar+0xb3/0xd3
>> [ 2.705686] [<ffffffff816cc992>] ? init_mtdchar+0x0/0xd3
>> [ 2.707470] [<ffffffff810001ef>] do_one_initcall+0x59/0x14e
>> [ 2.709255] [<ffffffff816a768a>] kernel_init+0x144/0x1ce
>> [ 2.711082] [<ffffffff81003054>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
>> [ 2.712862] [<ffffffff813ca480>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30
>> [ 2.714647] [<ffffffff816a7546>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1ce
>> [ 2.716415] [<ffffffff81003050>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10
>
> This looks like a new one! Does the following patch take care of it?
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> commit 2d54a6c31b72c902b09d365e9c66205a5c07e549
> Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date: Mon Jun 7 17:09:45 2010 -0700
>
> idr: fix RCU lockdep splat in idr_get_next()
>
> Convert to rcu_dereference_raw() given that many callers may have many
> different locking models.
>
> Located-by: Miles Lane <miles.lane@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> diff --git a/lib/idr.c b/lib/idr.c
> index 2eb1dca..f099f25 100644
> --- a/lib/idr.c
> +++ b/lib/idr.c
> @@ -599,7 +599,7 @@ void *idr_get_next(struct idr *idp, int *nextidp)
> /* find first ent */
> n = idp->layers * IDR_BITS;
> max = 1 << n;
> - p = rcu_dereference(idp->top);
> + p = rcu_dereference_raw(idp->top);
> if (!p)
> return NULL;
>
> @@ -607,7 +607,7 @@ void *idr_get_next(struct idr *idp, int *nextidp)
> while (n > 0 && p) {
> n -= IDR_BITS;
> *paa++ = p;
> - p = rcu_dereference(p->ary[(id >> n) & IDR_MASK]);
> + p = rcu_dereference_raw(p->ary[(id >> n) & IDR_MASK]);
> }
>
> if (p) {
>
Tested. Looks good!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists