Received: by 2002:a25:1506:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp5929373ybv; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 02:58:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzD+KCYO9H2IhgV8hdKLZag4ykAJaFVkj8R8TUNVdsKAoMnBAoT2gb5mc/oXV/KW0gQBhb8 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:2361:: with SMTP id r1mr8447499oth.88.1581505090404; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 02:58:10 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1581505090; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=KzJg+LI5lnUK5YLKYCHpUy2mL32lZdMoNaN5kqvGnv/GCa7H5IW5MM74rTmtTvTHkb ZfxdsoOxGtsxXHDUDZCKp9HHEPAijr8C8sDSYQILIM/i2gybRrItYOG2Z2aw+K8GWFLg zY/EICJKRsCYB53euYqmVomI3VZ5Q8l7r1BStBeU1aP4JxLHMhgo8jZdgW68l6ZCPPdC xAno6IzyTHyDt0J7gMudQl6ae22FX1UMmqtrFAot0JBf2Xs2UV+k2A56kttEMyb10OEQ aeX44fbd1MLQ4pgItrv9vdnD5XlbKvdYdLq0oBuIO+jwIaVAEPPZSK7NSqDaTA2bse5j 3keA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=PFew8rKg4ZVQwTxQ3iTASZzMVyEkdsLW0wvz/USyjXc=; b=wO040CYc9RYrqFQdp35uqff9zOmizqXFl6eCUNDD+QQQNZP9ZPkTDYL1FTm8tBvgi1 ww//LXCEBencTgTLiUyjMpwZ0bUV1ViAArxaq0d7wK7u9NKK6CaRDb6MM/1jWiDcMEAe C4Sux8acsY4nVh05RatfXNWxdBMI4tZeoR+RCWfvCE/tmxMPVU+hzf8zBf/Wm+RwcMEI 4II5xj7FcXVYLr2vfUnZUkd4yDM7NIN+AzZcmIPLGcqufE+jPbPezzeSRZhw0U9Mne4k vePmuedu2OUZtQNiFxz8QAmhcg/MMxN4K+XD3CnnVdH1DqVYysy3atto85Umw+gNfBf1 +LRg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=iirO+oAZ; 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; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g5si40733otn.232.2020.02.12.02.57.58; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 02:58:10 -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; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=iirO+oAZ; 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; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727787AbgBLK5s (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 12 Feb 2020 05:57:48 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-f193.google.com ([209.85.167.193]:34565 "EHLO mail-oi1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725821AbgBLK5s (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Feb 2020 05:57:48 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-f193.google.com with SMTP id l136so1621691oig.1 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 02:57:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PFew8rKg4ZVQwTxQ3iTASZzMVyEkdsLW0wvz/USyjXc=; b=iirO+oAZFl8gsKAMnIouY4KhKfolR3UjRoSSGTvIS/9XSfVVzSrsoIGFxRsKgDGYpz 7Dx4PWn2vXUOegzPDm1Y0NWqzpeXxxWzRWm0H8591CvKhBIm2fqmHXbLw6/9Gi3o6yvc oQU2zoT/vFU+4wcP8NEcvGp/6ZAYVoS3vnQ+XrkjLdVajeQQYHI++d3jEjti+AeqfjOz TrPkkkIlDPEaCAhWTxO6/g57cZp+F+B0ataNvVKetrCHkjC4YBA4NJfXkA7a5djmT5Vo o+2XEwNYBGa2a0zYnaKMdkAS3B485IP0xWzHJW+cjsyhwAZNScpfet2gbLLioDtu6v1j hMGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PFew8rKg4ZVQwTxQ3iTASZzMVyEkdsLW0wvz/USyjXc=; b=GDMXu/bAXhcTZIJJETl/6yNwAidQ5a4ZJWb6x4CgMDu07rf7GcJ4uycqkVRiPx/SV6 OjD0FLwYifYkpHUeC5ClCpgwoVuWrMIjtkTJ5MBPhhw0GUZqX7vNnmO4MpOsgzRoscDq k68MC0SlCSvg73Jz0NJOQoV35oNR7p43OWQa+8kzgRIAFX/unxTR6zin1cFyRmP6p0pq IclNqHfVCIl0nbReDjZ6b/EKcU+giIAhLhkfjUPdm91UJvBp5AxyMGt21kpwbnNpvLU7 qkUw5b78+gsDLUcBVkQ/ifRMcUDiWt5YnUe8S8h13ZQXqZRrsXGhbrU9BtZ19IBVSJUe r5jA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUyUCsMy0J5mjp3mfyPp/x1WWXcds6rTEmISn9NNSkO+RugnMTG /VwOxnUGSXDZUppKaSH4qFFbIRClxhPiLjqQKIoCBQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:8d5:: with SMTP id k21mr5883820oij.121.1581505067174; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 02:57:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200211160423.138870-1-elver@google.com> <20200211160423.138870-5-elver@google.com> <29718fab-0da5-e734-796c-339144ac5080@nvidia.com> In-Reply-To: <29718fab-0da5-e734-796c-339144ac5080@nvidia.com> From: Marco Elver Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 11:57:36 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] kcsan: Introduce ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(var, mask) To: John Hubbard Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Andrey Konovalov , Alexander Potapenko , Dmitry Vyukov , kasan-dev , LKML , Andrew Morton , David Hildenbrand , Jan Kara , Qian Cai Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 22:41, John Hubbard wrote: > > On 2/11/20 8:04 AM, Marco Elver wrote: > > This introduces ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(var, mask). > > ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(var, mask) will cause KCSAN to assume that the > > following access is safe w.r.t. data races (however, please see the > > docbook comment for disclaimer here). > > > > For more context on why this was considered necessary, please see: > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1580995070-25139-1-git-send-email-cai@lca.pw > > > > In particular, before this patch, data races between reads (that use > > @mask bits of an access that should not be modified concurrently) and > > writes (that change ~@mask bits not used by the readers) would have been > > annotated with "data_race()" (or "READ_ONCE()"). However, doing so would > > then hide real problems: we would no longer be able to detect harmful > > races between reads to @mask bits and writes to @mask bits. > > > > Therefore, by using ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(var, mask), we accomplish: > > > > 1. Avoid proliferation of specific macros at the call sites: by > > including a single mask in the argument list, we can use the same > > macro in a wide variety of call sites, regardless of how and which > > bits in a field each call site actually accesses. > > > > 2. The existing code does not need to be modified (although READ_ONCE() > > may still be advisable if we cannot prove that the data race is > > always safe). > > > > 3. We catch bugs where the exclusive bits are modified concurrently. > > > > 4. We document properties of the current code. > > > API looks good to me. (I'm not yet familiar enough with KCSAN to provide > any useful review of about the various kcsan*() calls that implement the > new macro.) > > btw, it might be helpful for newcomers if you mentioned which tree this > is based on. I poked around briefly and failed several times to find one. :) KCSAN is currently in -rcu (kcsan branch has the latest version), -tip, and -next. > You can add: > > Acked-by: John Hubbard Thank you! -- Marco > > thanks, > -- > John Hubbard > NVIDIA > > > > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver > > Cc: Andrew Morton > > Cc: David Hildenbrand > > Cc: Jan Kara > > Cc: John Hubbard > > Cc: Paul E. McKenney > > Cc: Qian Cai > > --- > > v2: > > * Update API documentation to be clearer about how this compares to the > > existing assertions, and update use-cases. [Based on suggestions from > > John Hubbard] > > * Update commit message. [Suggestions from John Hubbard] > > --- > > include/linux/kcsan-checks.h | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > kernel/kcsan/debugfs.c | 15 +++++++- > > 2 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/kcsan-checks.h b/include/linux/kcsan-checks.h > > index 4ef5233ff3f04..1b8aac5d6a0b5 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/kcsan-checks.h > > +++ b/include/linux/kcsan-checks.h > > @@ -152,9 +152,9 @@ static inline void kcsan_check_access(const volatile void *ptr, size_t size, > > #endif > > > > /** > > - * ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER - assert no other threads are writing @var > > + * ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER - assert no concurrent writes to @var > > * > > - * Assert that there are no other threads writing @var; other readers are > > + * Assert that there are no concurrent writes to @var; other readers are > > * allowed. This assertion can be used to specify properties of concurrent code, > > * where violation cannot be detected as a normal data race. > > * > > @@ -171,11 +171,11 @@ static inline void kcsan_check_access(const volatile void *ptr, size_t size, > > __kcsan_check_access(&(var), sizeof(var), KCSAN_ACCESS_ASSERT) > > > > /** > > - * ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_ACCESS - assert no other threads are accessing @var > > + * ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_ACCESS - assert no concurrent accesses to @var > > * > > - * Assert that no other thread is accessing @var (no readers nor writers). This > > - * assertion can be used to specify properties of concurrent code, where > > - * violation cannot be detected as a normal data race. > > + * Assert that there are no concurrent accesses to @var (no readers nor > > + * writers). This assertion can be used to specify properties of concurrent > > + * code, where violation cannot be detected as a normal data race. > > * > > * For example, in a reference-counting algorithm where exclusive access is > > * expected after the refcount reaches 0. We can check that this property > > @@ -191,4 +191,61 @@ static inline void kcsan_check_access(const volatile void *ptr, size_t size, > > #define ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_ACCESS(var) \ > > __kcsan_check_access(&(var), sizeof(var), KCSAN_ACCESS_WRITE | KCSAN_ACCESS_ASSERT) > > > > +/** > > + * ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS - assert no concurrent writes to subset of bits in @var > > + * > > + * Bit-granular variant of ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER(var). > > + * > > + * Assert that there are no concurrent writes to a subset of bits in @var; > > + * concurrent readers are permitted. This assertion captures more detailed > > + * bit-level properties, compared to the other (word granularity) assertions. > > + * Only the bits set in @mask are checked for concurrent modifications, while > > + * ignoring the remaining bits, i.e. concurrent writes (or reads) to ~@mask bits > > + * are ignored. > > + * > > + * Use this for variables, where some bits must not be modified concurrently, > > + * yet other bits are expected to be modified concurrently. > > + * > > + * For example, variables where, after initialization, some bits are read-only, > > + * but other bits may still be modified concurrently. A reader may wish to > > + * assert that this is true as follows: > > + * > > + * ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(flags, READ_ONLY_MASK); > > + * foo = (READ_ONCE(flags) & READ_ONLY_MASK) >> READ_ONLY_SHIFT; > > + * > > + * Note: The access that immediately follows ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS() is > > + * assumed to access the masked bits only, and KCSAN optimistically assumes it > > + * is therefore safe, even in the presence of data races, and marking it with > > + * READ_ONCE() is optional from KCSAN's point-of-view. We caution, however, > > + * that it may still be advisable to do so, since we cannot reason about all > > + * compiler optimizations when it comes to bit manipulations (on the reader > > + * and writer side). If you are sure nothing can go wrong, we can write the > > + * above simply as: > > + * > > + * ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(flags, READ_ONLY_MASK); > > + * foo = (flags & READ_ONLY_MASK) >> READ_ONLY_SHIFT; > > + * > > + * Another example, where this may be used, is when certain bits of @var may > > + * only be modified when holding the appropriate lock, but other bits may still > > + * be modified concurrently. Writers, where other bits may change concurrently, > > + * could use the assertion as follows: > > + * > > + * spin_lock(&foo_lock); > > + * ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(flags, FOO_MASK); > > + * old_flags = READ_ONCE(flags); > > + * new_flags = (old_flags & ~FOO_MASK) | (new_foo << FOO_SHIFT); > > + * if (cmpxchg(&flags, old_flags, new_flags) != old_flags) { ... } > > + * spin_unlock(&foo_lock); > > + * > > + * @var variable to assert on > > + * @mask only check for modifications to bits set in @mask > > + */ > > +#define ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(var, mask) \ > > + do { \ > > + kcsan_set_access_mask(mask); \ > > + __kcsan_check_access(&(var), sizeof(var), KCSAN_ACCESS_ASSERT);\ > > + kcsan_set_access_mask(0); \ > > + kcsan_atomic_next(1); \ > > + } while (0) > > + > > #endif /* _LINUX_KCSAN_CHECKS_H */ > > diff --git a/kernel/kcsan/debugfs.c b/kernel/kcsan/debugfs.c > > index 9bbba0e57c9b3..2ff1961239778 100644 > > --- a/kernel/kcsan/debugfs.c > > +++ b/kernel/kcsan/debugfs.c > > @@ -100,8 +100,10 @@ static noinline void microbenchmark(unsigned long iters) > > * debugfs file from multiple tasks to generate real conflicts and show reports. > > */ > > static long test_dummy; > > +static long test_flags; > > static noinline void test_thread(unsigned long iters) > > { > > + const long CHANGE_BITS = 0xff00ff00ff00ff00L; > > const struct kcsan_ctx ctx_save = current->kcsan_ctx; > > cycles_t cycles; > > > > @@ -109,16 +111,27 @@ static noinline void test_thread(unsigned long iters) > > memset(¤t->kcsan_ctx, 0, sizeof(current->kcsan_ctx)); > > > > pr_info("KCSAN: %s begin | iters: %lu\n", __func__, iters); > > + pr_info("test_dummy@%px, test_flags@%px\n", &test_dummy, &test_flags); > > > > cycles = get_cycles(); > > while (iters--) { > > + /* These all should generate reports. */ > > __kcsan_check_read(&test_dummy, sizeof(test_dummy)); > > - __kcsan_check_write(&test_dummy, sizeof(test_dummy)); > > ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_WRITER(test_dummy); > > ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_ACCESS(test_dummy); > > > > + ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(test_flags, ~CHANGE_BITS); /* no report */ > > + __kcsan_check_read(&test_flags, sizeof(test_flags)); /* no report */ > > + > > + ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_BITS(test_flags, CHANGE_BITS); /* report */ > > + __kcsan_check_read(&test_flags, sizeof(test_flags)); /* no report */ > > + > > /* not actually instrumented */ > > WRITE_ONCE(test_dummy, iters); /* to observe value-change */ > > + __kcsan_check_write(&test_dummy, sizeof(test_dummy)); > > + > > + test_flags ^= CHANGE_BITS; /* generate value-change */ > > + __kcsan_check_write(&test_flags, sizeof(test_flags)); > > } > > cycles = get_cycles() - cycles; > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "kasan-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kasan-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kasan-dev/29718fab-0da5-e734-796c-339144ac5080%40nvidia.com.