[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <282f0f8d-f491-26fc-6ae0-604b367a5a1a@amd.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 21:07:03 +0100
From: Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@...il.com>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Cristiano Giuffrida <c.giuffrida@...nl>,
amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
CIFS <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, "Bos, H.J." <h.j.bos@...nl>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Arnd Bergman <arnd@...db.de>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@...il.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-tegra <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux F2FS Dev Mailing List
<linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
dma <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] treewide: remove using list iterator after loop body
as a ptr
Am 28.02.22 um 20:56 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 4:19 AM Christian König
> <christian.koenig@....com> wrote:
>> I don't think that using the extra variable makes the code in any way
>> more reliable or easier to read.
> So I think the next step is to do the attached patch (which requires
> that "-std=gnu11" that was discussed in the original thread).
>
> That will guarantee that the 'pos' parameter of list_for_each_entry()
> is only updated INSIDE the for_each_list_entry() loop, and can never
> point to the (wrongly typed) head entry.
>
> And I would actually hope that it should actually cause compiler
> warnings about possibly uninitialized variables if people then use the
> 'pos' pointer outside the loop. Except
>
> (a) that code in sgx/encl.c currently initializes 'tmp' to NULL for
> inexplicable reasons - possibly because it already expected this
> behavior
>
> (b) when I remove that NULL initializer, I still don't get a warning,
> because we've disabled -Wno-maybe-uninitialized since it results in so
> many false positives.
>
> Oh well.
>
> Anyway, give this patch a look, and at least if it's expanded to do
> "(pos) = NULL" in the entry statement for the for-loop, it will avoid
> the HEAD type confusion that Jakob is working on. And I think in a
> cleaner way than the horrid games he plays.
>
> (But it won't avoid possible CPU speculation of such type confusion.
> That, in my opinion, is a completely different issue)
Yes, completely agree.
> I do wish we could actually poison the 'pos' value after the loop
> somehow - but clearly the "might be uninitialized" I was hoping for
> isn't the way to do it.
>
> Anybody have any ideas?
I think we should look at the use cases why code is touching (pos) after
the loop.
Just from skimming over the patches to change this and experience with
the drivers/subsystems I help to maintain I think the primary pattern
looks something like this:
list_for_each_entry(entry, head, member) {
if (some_condition_checking(entry))
break;
}
do_something_with(entry);
So the solution should probably not be to change all those use cases to
use more temporary variables, but rather to add a list_find_entry(...,
condition) macro and consistently use that one instead.
Regards,
Christian.
>
> Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists