On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 08:40:34AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 11:08:23PM -0500, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > > From: Joel Fernandes <j...@joelfernandes.org> > > > > rtnl_register_internal() and rtnl_unregister_all tries to directly > > dereference an RCU protected pointed outside RCU read side section. > > While this is Ok to do since a lock is held, let us use the correct > > API to avoid programmer bugs in the future. > > > > This also fixes sparse warnings arising from not using RCU API. > > > > net/core/rtnetlink.c:332:13: warning: incorrect type in assignment > > (different address spaces) net/core/rtnetlink.c:332:13: expected > > struct rtnl_link **tab net/core/rtnetlink.c:332:13: got struct > > rtnl_link *[noderef] <asn:4>*<noident> > > > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <j...@joelfernandes.org> > > First, thank you for doing this!
No problem, it is my pleasure. It is just good to see these warnings/errors show up (which I didn't anticipate when I first wrote the check) so we can harden the kernel more fwiw. > I was going to complain that these were update-side accesses, but it > looks like rtnl_dereference() already handles both readers and updaters. > > So looks good to me, but the maintainers of course have the final word. Thanks! Also my confidence level is a bit less for patches 4/5 and 5/5, could you share your thoughts on those? The scheduler code seems to use rcu_assign_pointer() in those where it seems a WRITE_ONCE() would just suffice. In fact, in some cases I replaced with smp_store_release() just to be safe. Speaking of which, do you feel those are legit uses of rcu_assign_pointer() or would you expect rcu_assign_pointer() to be used only for RCU protected pointers? I am hoping it is the latter since that is what the sparse check expects (and RCU protected pointer being assigned to). - Joel > > > --- > > net/core/rtnetlink.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/net/core/rtnetlink.c b/net/core/rtnetlink.c > > index 5ea1bed08ede..98be4b4818a9 100644 > > --- a/net/core/rtnetlink.c > > +++ b/net/core/rtnetlink.c > > @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int rtnl_register_internal(struct module *owner, > > msgindex = rtm_msgindex(msgtype); > > > > rtnl_lock(); > > - tab = rtnl_msg_handlers[protocol]; > > + tab = rtnl_dereference(rtnl_msg_handlers[protocol]); > > if (tab == NULL) { > > tab = kcalloc(RTM_NR_MSGTYPES, sizeof(void *), GFP_KERNEL); > > if (!tab) > > @@ -329,7 +329,7 @@ void rtnl_unregister_all(int protocol) > > BUG_ON(protocol < 0 || protocol > RTNL_FAMILY_MAX); > > > > rtnl_lock(); > > - tab = rtnl_msg_handlers[protocol]; > > + tab = rtnl_dereference(rtnl_msg_handlers[protocol]); > > if (!tab) { > > rtnl_unlock(); > > return; > > -- > > 2.21.0.rc0.258.g878e2cd30e-goog > > >