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;
Date:   Fri, 29 Nov 2019 15:08:17 -0500
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To:     Amol Grover <frextrite@gmail.com>
Cc:     Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>, Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>, linux-audit@redhat.com,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel: audit.c: Add __rcu notation to RCU pointer
Message-ID: <20191129200817.GB239292@google.com>
References: <20191126172723.GA12759@workstation-kernel-dev>
 <20191127022925.GB157739@google.com>
 <20191127052827.GA9782@workstation-portable>
 <CAEXW_YS=eDhmv+MaKLoRTCcPknscxqfHa2TyrjAEXpug1g67jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191128150949.GA30181@workstation-portable>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191128150949.GA30181@workstation-portable>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 08:39:49PM +0530, Amol Grover wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 10:25:57AM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:29 AM Amol Grover <frextrite@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 09:29:25PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 10:57:23PM +0530, Amol Grover wrote:
> > > > > add __rcu notation to RCU protected global pointer auditd_conn
> > > > >
> > > > > Fixes multiple instances of sparse error:
> > > > > error: incompatible types in comparison expression
> > > > > (different address spaces)
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Amol Grover <frextrite@gmail.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  kernel/audit.c | 6 ++++--
> > > > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/kernel/audit.c b/kernel/audit.c
> > > > > index da8dc0db5bd3..30e7fc9b8da2 100644
> > > > > --- a/kernel/audit.c
> > > > > +++ b/kernel/audit.c
> > > > > @@ -102,12 +102,14 @@ struct audit_net {
> > > > >   * This struct is RCU protected; you must either hold the RCU lock for reading
> > > > >   * or the associated spinlock for writing.
> > > > >   */
> > > > > -static struct auditd_connection {
> > > > > +struct auditd_connection {
> > > > >     struct pid *pid;
> > > > >     u32 portid;
> > > > >     struct net *net;
> > > > >     struct rcu_head rcu;
> > > > > -} *auditd_conn = NULL;
> > > > > +};
> > > > > +static struct auditd_connection __rcu *auditd_conn;
> > > > > +RCU_INIT_POINTER(auditd_conn);
> > > >
> > > > Looks like this causes a build error. Always please build test your patches
> > > > in the very least. And I also did not understand how RCU_INIT_POINTER can
> > > > even be used outside of a function. In C, executable code cannot be outside
> > > > functions.
> > > >
> > > > Is doing the following not sufficient to fix the sparse issue?
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > >
> > > >  - Joel
> > > >
> > > > ---8<-----------------------
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/audit.c b/kernel/audit.c
> > > > index 49b6049b26ac..c5d4b5a2dea1 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/audit.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/audit.c
> > > > @@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ struct auditd_connection {
> > > >       struct net *net;
> > > >       struct rcu_head rcu;
> > > >  };
> > > > -static struct auditd_connection __rcu *auditd_conn;
> > > > -RCU_INIT_POINTER(auditd_conn);
> > > > +static struct auditd_connection __rcu *auditd_conn = NULL;
> > >
> > > I ran a quick checkpatch and it gave me this error:
> > > ERROR: do not initialise statics to NULL
> > >
> > > So in order to fix it I decided to INIT the pointer (and failed)
> > 
> > Well, try to understand the checkpatch error then, and do the right thing :)
> 
> I read-up a few articles about this. I think I've understood the problem. I'm
> sending in the ammended patch now. Sorry for this. Won't happen again.

Oh, no need apology. You are learning. But yeah always do a thorough job
before sending patches.

thanks,

 - Joel