Received: by 2002:ac0:a679:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id p54csp959184imp; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:07:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYUWpvoimbW+zoCi84nPITucil1FJq3jSisqK8Qc+LrhNEoHwm3n6+I8X8zTp0eXFCbMS2A X-Received: by 2002:a63:c204:: with SMTP id b4mr884779pgd.335.1550790441321; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:07:21 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1550790441; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=pcwB4v/kMT5P3CZIPM0w1CxGRtbzEHPC1j4hhVyXgrlQig90H0CUNW3Ft0iMrzKgz9 6TMZ69Zh/VNepaVP3sTRNUxU4eoeuYzHTnfoHwIScs/RyubXoqyXgbDImafrKeMmhHZh Iv2daLYyavrU+0tQrQ0DsvCKpJrBaecBmV/VqqsCpQQue61RaCIfJOhFd87/vcXUkAst FFYyqOmbYl6F7KO3CDPfKOCQS+tBvSfyaI0hT6Qc4lUStyVBLdv8NAB+P8QPnAAf3hdt nUdubjZHw+S/cYo2p9n8Zvy+iyiiQSX1DjP1SB1OyozyTIi1azX91vLgw/fU5/2NEiGj MHEg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from; bh=0wmMc1xxDMAeH/UeuGym/gXIY+0uod5Pabs21scehG8=; b=bboAnL9rouWJKwWyXHiNNZW25WybTzmidswNorQ4zDhNeduQNe7Zk6CW2YqNQKFSwI oUilrPle2eV/dPJufqn14XIh+D6z5YtEl5DKy8jXcLJgQEdVe4BnVaeBXuMrCZ5fgSMm GDXCIIEM98Qt17oPBdiiIkPv9ZApfgQLpTA38QrVegXxsqM/mdfgSzdhPD8L1ixa3mQx ntMOnXCH00KuMR54UV1Y4+xlrmIxsRDRAXYtB7+O19VvWrkRFa+Oc+Il7M1miU5PzyNa seVYws5uLsollcUBM0eyffe0Moz0uy5TSLwFgVIDQL0fh8CUpyeRhdMhKc4WkY1MGBXU Wt9A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 187si166084pfb.41.2019.02.21.15.07.05; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:07:21 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726972AbfBUXGj (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:06:39 -0500 Received: from cloudserver094114.home.pl ([79.96.170.134]:63179 "EHLO cloudserver094114.home.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726035AbfBUXGj (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2019 18:06:39 -0500 Received: from 79.184.254.15.ipv4.supernova.orange.pl (79.184.254.15) (HELO aspire.rjw.lan) by serwer1319399.home.pl (79.96.170.134) with SMTP (IdeaSmtpServer 0.83.213) id ab686fc6f3bb911d; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 00:06:36 +0100 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov , Christian Brauner , Daniel Borkmann , David Ahern , "David S. Miller" , Ido Schimmel , Ingo Molnar , "moderated list:INTEL ETHERNET DRIVERS" , Jakub Kicinski , Jeff Kirsher , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , John Fastabend , Josh Triplett , keescook@chromium.org, Lai Jiangshan , Martin KaFai Lau , Mathieu Desnoyers , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E. McKenney" , Peter Zijlstra , rcu@vger.kernel.org, Song Liu , Steven Rostedt , xdp-newbies@vger.kernel.org, Yonghong Song Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/5] sched/cpufreq: Fix incorrect RCU API usage Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 00:05:08 +0100 Message-ID: <3194474.xhKMNsEZRq@aspire.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <20190221054942.132388-4-joel@joelfernandes.org> References: <20190221054942.132388-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20190221054942.132388-4-joel@joelfernandes.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, February 21, 2019 6:49:40 AM CET Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > Recently I added an RCU annotation check to rcu_assign_pointer(). All > pointers assigned to RCU protected data are to be annotated with __rcu > inorder to be able to use rcu_assign_pointer() similar to checks in > other RCU APIs. > > This resulted in a sparse error: kernel//sched/cpufreq.c:41:9: sparse: > error: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address > spaces) > > Fix this by using the correct APIs for RCU accesses. This will > potentially avoid any future bugs in the code. If it is felt that RCU > protection is not needed here, then the rcu_assign_pointer call can be > dropped and replaced with, say, WRITE_ONCE or smp_store_release. Or, may > be we add a new API to do it. But calls rcu_assign_pointer seems an > abuse of the RCU API unless RCU is being used. > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) > --- > kernel/sched/cpufreq.c | 8 ++++++-- > kernel/sched/sched.h | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/cpufreq.c b/kernel/sched/cpufreq.c > index 22bd8980f32f..c9aeb3bf5dc2 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/cpufreq.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/cpufreq.c > @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ > */ > #include "sched.h" > > -DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct update_util_data *, cpufreq_update_util_data); > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct update_util_data __rcu *, cpufreq_update_util_data); > > /** > * cpufreq_add_update_util_hook - Populate the CPU's update_util_data pointer. > @@ -34,8 +34,12 @@ void cpufreq_add_update_util_hook(int cpu, struct update_util_data *data, > if (WARN_ON(!data || !func)) > return; > > - if (WARN_ON(per_cpu(cpufreq_update_util_data, cpu))) > + rcu_read_lock(); > + if (WARN_ON(rcu_dereference(per_cpu(cpufreq_update_util_data, cpu)))) { > + rcu_read_unlock(); > return; > + } > + rcu_read_unlock(); As Steve said, this is not a read-side critical section, so the rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() don't help. But rcu_access_pointer() should work here AFAICS. Cheers, Rafael