Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-175868-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 07:11:05 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@gmail.com>, RCU <rcu@vger.kernel.org>,
	Neeraj upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@amd.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@sony.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/48] rcu: Mark writes to rcu_sync ->gp_count field
Message-ID: <474ae55c-fe9e-4668-8f9b-23f819c76d10@paulmck-laptop>
Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org
References: <20240507093530.3043-1-urezki@gmail.com>
 <20240507093530.3043-26-urezki@gmail.com>
 <ZjpAsYJIfzYSKgdA@redhat.com>
 <4c9e89b5-c981-4809-8bc2-247563ce04e9@paulmck-laptop>
 <20240510131849.GB24764@redhat.com>
 <20240510135057.GC24764@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240510135057.GC24764@redhat.com>

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 03:50:57PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 05/10, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > On 05/07, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > By the stricter data-race rules used in RCU code [1],
> > ...
> > > [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FwZaXSg3A55ivVoWffA9iMuhJ3_Gmj_E494dLYjjyLQ/edit?usp=sharing
> >
> > I am getting more and more confused...
> >
> > Does this mean that KCSAN/etc treats the files in kernel/rcu/
> > differently than the "Rest of Kernel"? Or what?
> >
> > And how is it enforced?
> 
> I can only find the strnstr(buf, "rcu") checks in skip_report(),
> but they only cover the KCSAN_REPORT_VALUE_CHANGE_ONLY case...

Huh, new one on me!  When I run KCSAN, I set CONFIG_KCSAN_STRICT=y,
which implies CONFIG_KCSAN_REPORT_VALUE_CHANGE_ONLY=n, which should
prevent skip_report() from even being invoked.

Which suggests that in the rest of the kernel, including "rcu_"
in your function name gets you stricter KCSAN checking.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul