Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755588AbcLOHov (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2016 02:44:51 -0500 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.83]:50340 "EHLO mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751125AbcLOHou (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2016 02:44:50 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,350,1477954800"; d="scan'208";a="250149741" Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 08:44:46 +0100 (CET) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Nicholas Mc Guire cc: Julia Lawall , Nicholas Mc Guire , Gilles Muller , Nicolas Palix , Michal Marek , Thomas Gleixner , Joe Perches , cocci@systeme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] Coccinelle: check usleep_range() usage In-Reply-To: <20161215061624.GA23684@osadl.at> Message-ID: References: <1481769711-14793-1-git-send-email-hofrat@osadl.org> <20161215061624.GA23684@osadl.at> User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 6521 Lines: 177 On Thu, 15 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 06:52:28AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 15 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote: > > > > > Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt outlines the intended usage of > > > usleep_range(), this spatch tries to locate missuse/out-of-spec cases. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire > > > --- > > > V2: added context mode as suggested by Julia Lawall > > > added min > > > added in the range checks as they are resonably reliable based on > > > a review of all 1648 call sites of usleep_range() > > > > > > 1648 calls total > > > 1488 pass numeric values only (90.29%) > > > 27 min below 10us (1.81%) > > > 40 min above 10ms (2.68%) > > > min out of spec 4.50% > > > 76 preprocessor constants (4.61%) > > > 1 min below 10us (1.31%) > > > 8 min above 10ms (10.52%) > > > min out of spec 11.84% > > > 85 expressions (5.15%) > > > 1(0) min below 10us (1.50%)* > > > 6(2) min above 10ms (7.50%)* > > > min out of spec 9.0% > > > Errors: > > > 23 where min==max (1.39%) > > > 0 where max < min (0.00%) > > > > > > Total: > > > Bugs: 6.48%-10.70%* > > > Crit: 3.09%-3.15%* (min < 10, min==max, max < min) > > > Detectable by coccinelle: > > > Bugs: 74/103 (71.8%) > > > Crit: 50/52 (96.1%) > > > * numbers estimated based on code review > > > > > > Patch is againts 4.9.0 (localversion-next is next-20161214) > > > > > > scripts/coccinelle/api/bad_usleep_range.cocci | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 88 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/bad_usleep_range.cocci > > > > > > diff --git a/scripts/coccinelle/api/bad_usleep_range.cocci b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bad_usleep_range.cocci > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..003e9ef > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/api/bad_usleep_range.cocci > > > @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ > > > +/// report bad/problematic usleep_range usage > > > +// > > > +// This is a checker for the documented intended use of usleep_range > > > +// see: Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt and > > > +// Link: http://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/29/54 for some notes on > > > +// when mdelay might not be a suitable replacement > > > +// > > > +// Limitations: > > > +// * The numeric limits are only checked when numeric constants are in > > > +// use (as of 4.9.0 thats 90.29% of the calls) no constant folding > > > +// is done - so this can miss some out-of-range cases - but in 4.9.0 > > > +// it was catching 74 of the 103 bad cases (71.8%) and 50 of 52 > > > +// (96.1%) of the critical cases (min < 10 and min==max - there > > > +// * There may be RT use-cases where both min < 10 and min==max) > > > +// justified (e.g. high-throughput drivers on a shielded core) > > > +// > > > +// 1) warn if min == max > > > +// > > > +// The problem is that usleep_range is calculating the delay by > > > +// exp = ktime_add_us(ktime_get(), min) > > > +// delta = (u64)(max - min) * NSEC_PER_USEC > > > +// so delta is set to 0 if min==max > > > +// and then calls > > > +// schedule_hrtimeout_range(exp, 0,...) > > > +// effectively this means that the clock subsystem has no room to > > > +// optimize. usleep_range() is in non-atomic context so a 0 range > > > +// makes very little sense as the task can be preempted anyway so > > > +// there is no guarantee that the 0 range would be adding much > > > +// precision - it just removes optimization potential, so it probably > > > +// never really makes sense. > > > +// > > > +// 2) warn if min < 10 or min > 20ms > > > +// > > > +// it makes little sense to use a non-atomic call for very short > > > +// delays because the scheduling jitter will most likely exceed > > > +// this limit - udelay() makes more sense in that case. For very > > > +// large delays using hrtimers is useless as preemption becomes > > > +// quite likely resulting in high inaccuracy anyway - so use > > > +// jiffies based msleep and don't burden the hrtimer subsystem. > > > +// > > > +// 3) warn if max < min > > > +// > > > +// Joe Perches added a check for this case > > > +// that is definitely wrong. > > > +// > > > +// Confidence: Moderate > > > +// Copyright: (C) 2016 Nicholas Mc Guire, OSADL. GPLv2. > > > +// Comments: > > > +// Options: --no-includes --include-headers > > > + > > > +virtual org > > > +virtual report > > > +virtual context > > > + > > > +@nullrangectx depends on context@ > > > +expression E1,E2; > > > +position p; > > > +@@ > > > + > > > +* usleep_range@p(E1,E2) > > > > This is going to give a context warning on every call to usleep_range. > > Why not E1,E1? > yes this triggers on all use of usleep_ranges - as the report mode is > checking for more than just min==max I thought its resonable to simply > report all cases - maybe not. > Not sure if it makes sense to add in the filter from below, I think that simply flagging all the calls for context mode is not a good idea. Especilly since there is no explanation in this case. If it is too awkward to support context mode, just drop it. julia > > Thre actually are quite a few bad use patters beyond these basic ones > like > unsigned long timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(250); > > - while (time_before(jiffies, timeout)) { > value = fpci_readl(tegra, XUSB_CFG_ARU_MBOX_OWNER); > if (value == MBOX_OWNER_NONE) > break; > > - usleep_range(10, 20); > } > > > > > > + > > > + > > > +@nullrange@ > > > +expression E1,E2; > > > +position p; > > > +@@ > > > + > > > + usleep_range@p(E1,E2) > > > + > > > +@script:python depends on !context@ > > > +p << nullrange.p; > > > +min << nullrange.E1; > > > +max << nullrange.E2; > > > +@@ > > > + > > > +if(min == max): > > > + msg = "WARNING: usleep_range min == max (%s) - consider delta " % (min) > > > + coccilib.report.print_report(p[0], msg) > > > +if str.isdigit(min): > > > > I guess this checks if min is a constant, but doesn't the last case also > > need to check if max is a constant? > > > yes it does - seems that there simply was no > such case so it went unnoticed. > > also just noticed that the org mode would also be using > coccilib.report rather than coccilib.org... > > thx! > hofrat > >