[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1345184349-5849-1-git-send-email-fan.du@windriver.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 14:19:09 +0800
From: Fan Du <fan.du@...driver.com>
To: <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] xfrm:Use rcu_dereference_bh to deference pointer protected by rcu_read_lock_bh
418a99ac6ad487dc9c42e6b0e85f941af56330f2 "Replace rwlock on xfrm_policy_afinfo with rcu"
triggers below warnings, which is caused by abusing rcu_dereference_bh with rcu_read_lock.
RCU rules must be honored:
- rcu_dereference_bh paired with rcu_read_lock_bh/rcu_read_unlock_bh
- rcu_dereference paired with rcu_read_lock/rcu_read_unlock
[ 0.921216]
[ 0.921645] ===============================
[ 0.922766] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ]
[ 0.923887] 3.5.0-01540-g1669891 #64 Not tainted
[ 0.925123] -------------------------------
[ 0.932860] /c/kernel-tests/src/tip/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:2504 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
[ 0.935361]
[ 0.935361] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 0.935361]
[ 0.937472]
[ 0.937472] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
[ 0.939182] 2 locks held by swapper/1:
[ 0.940171] #0: (net_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff814e1ad0>] register_pernet_subsys+0x21/0x57
[ 0.942705] #1: (rcu_read_lock_bh){......}, at: [<ffffffff822c7329>] xfrm_net_init+0x1e4/0x437
[ 0.951507]
[ 0.951507] stack backtrace:
[ 0.952660] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 3.5.0-01540-g1669891 #64
[ 0.954364] Call Trace:
[ 0.955074] [<ffffffff8108b375>] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0x174/0x187
[ 0.956736] [<ffffffff822c7453>] xfrm_net_init+0x30e/0x437
[ 0.958205] [<ffffffff822c7329>] ? xfrm_net_init+0x1e4/0x437
[ 0.959712] [<ffffffff814e134a>] ops_init+0x1bb/0x1ff
[ 0.961067] [<ffffffff810861f9>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0x1b/0x24
[ 0.962644] [<ffffffff814e17cd>] register_pernet_operations.isra.5+0x9d/0xfe
[ 0.971376] [<ffffffff814e1adf>] register_pernet_subsys+0x30/0x57
[ 0.972992] [<ffffffff822c7130>] xfrm_init+0x17/0x2c
[ 0.974316] [<ffffffff822c2f8c>] ip_rt_init+0x82/0xe7
[ 0.975668] [<ffffffff822c31dc>] ip_init+0x10/0x25
[ 0.976952] [<ffffffff822c3f77>] inet_init+0x235/0x360
[ 0.978352] [<ffffffff822c3d42>] ? devinet_init+0xf2/0xf2
[ 0.979808] [<ffffffff82283252>] do_one_initcall+0xb4/0x203
[ 0.981313] [<ffffffff8228354a>] kernel_init+0x1a9/0x29a
[ 0.982732] [<ffffffff822826d9>] ? loglevel+0x46/0x46
[ 0.990889] [<ffffffff816d3d84>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
[ 0.992472] [<ffffffff816d262c>] ? retint_restore_args+0x13/0x13
[ 0.994076] [<ffffffff822833a1>] ? do_one_initcall+0x203/0x203
[ 0.995636] [<ffffffff816d3d80>] ? gs_change+0x13/0x13
[ 0.997197] TCP established hash table entries: 8192 (order: 5, 131072 bytes)
[ 1.000074] TCP bind hash table entries: 8192 (order: 7, 655360 bytes)
Reported-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Tested-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Signed-off-by: Fan Du <fan.du@...driver.com>
---
net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
index 5ad4d2c..6405764 100644
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
@@ -2501,11 +2501,11 @@ static void __net_init xfrm_dst_ops_init(struct net *net)
struct xfrm_policy_afinfo *afinfo;
rcu_read_lock_bh();
- afinfo = rcu_dereference(xfrm_policy_afinfo[AF_INET]);
+ afinfo = rcu_dereference_bh(xfrm_policy_afinfo[AF_INET]);
if (afinfo)
net->xfrm.xfrm4_dst_ops = *afinfo->dst_ops;
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6)
- afinfo = rcu_dereference(xfrm_policy_afinfo[AF_INET6]);
+ afinfo = rcu_dereference_bh(xfrm_policy_afinfo[AF_INET6]);
if (afinfo)
net->xfrm.xfrm6_dst_ops = *afinfo->dst_ops;
#endif
--
1.7.1
--
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