All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
	Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
	Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@nttdata.co.jp>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
	Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	llvm@lists.linux.dev, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/34] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 15:36:19 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aJNaUwoDjuGfplLm@elver.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250305112041.GA16878@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 12:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> Right, so since this is all awesome, I figured I should try and have it
> compile kernel/sched/, see how far I get.
> 
[...]

It's been a while, but teaching Clang new tricks for this analysis has
been taking its time (and I've only been looking into this on and off).

Anyway, Clang has already gained __attribute__((reentrant_capability).
Of course, that alone doesn't quite help that much.
But what we really wanted, I think, per this Clang discussion thread
[1], was some "simple" form of intra-procedural alias analysis.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CANpmjNPquO=W1JAh1FNQb8pMQjgeZAKCPQUAd7qUg=5pjJ6x=Q@mail.gmail.com/

Anyway, this evolving Clang PR probably gets us pretty close:
 https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142955

With Clang from that PR, I can compile kernel/sched/{core.c, fair.c}
with modest changes (see below - work in progress) without warnings.
Notably, this can also deal with "capability acquired in returned
object" with some macro magic.

The full v3 series preview is here:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/melver/linux.git/log/?h=cap-analysis/dev

The whole tree compiles cleanly, although I might have missed testing
some kernel configs.

If/when that Clang PR lands (~ETA another month probably), I would think
about sending the next version of this series.

Thanks,
-- Marco

------ >8 ------

From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2025 20:21:39 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] sched: Enable capability analysis for core.c and fair.c

This demonstrates a larger conversion to use Clang's capability
analysis. The benefit is additional static checking of locking rules,
along with better documentation.

Arguably, kernel/sched is the "final boss" of Clang's capability
analysis, and application to core.c & fair.c demonstrates that the
latest Clang version has become powerful enough to start applying this
to more complex subsystems (with some modest annotations and changes).

Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
---
v3:
* New patch.
---
 include/linux/sched.h                       |   6 +-
 include/linux/sched/signal.h                |   4 +-
 include/linux/sched/task.h                  |   5 +-
 include/linux/sched/wake_q.h                |   3 +
 kernel/sched/Makefile                       |   3 +
 kernel/sched/core.c                         |  82 ++++++++++-----
 kernel/sched/fair.c                         |   6 +-
 kernel/sched/sched.h                        | 108 +++++++++++++-------
 scripts/capability-analysis-suppression.txt |   1 +
 9 files changed, 148 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
index aa9c5be7a632..3ac9d2407773 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -2125,9 +2125,9 @@ static inline int _cond_resched(void)
 	_cond_resched();			\
 })
 
-extern int __cond_resched_lock(spinlock_t *lock);
-extern int __cond_resched_rwlock_read(rwlock_t *lock);
-extern int __cond_resched_rwlock_write(rwlock_t *lock);
+extern int __cond_resched_lock(spinlock_t *lock) __must_hold(lock);
+extern int __cond_resched_rwlock_read(rwlock_t *lock) __must_hold_shared(lock);
+extern int __cond_resched_rwlock_write(rwlock_t *lock) __must_hold(lock);
 
 #define MIGHT_RESCHED_RCU_SHIFT		8
 #define MIGHT_RESCHED_PREEMPT_MASK	((1U << MIGHT_RESCHED_RCU_SHIFT) - 1)
diff --git a/include/linux/sched/signal.h b/include/linux/sched/signal.h
index bc7f83b012fb..6f581a750e84 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched/signal.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/signal.h
@@ -734,10 +734,12 @@ static inline int thread_group_empty(struct task_struct *p)
 		(thread_group_leader(p) && !thread_group_empty(p))
 
 extern struct sighand_struct *lock_task_sighand(struct task_struct *task,
-						unsigned long *flags);
+						unsigned long *flags)
+	__acquires(&task->sighand->siglock);
 
 static inline void unlock_task_sighand(struct task_struct *task,
 						unsigned long *flags)
+	__releases(&task->sighand->siglock)
 {
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&task->sighand->siglock, *flags);
 }
diff --git a/include/linux/sched/task.h b/include/linux/sched/task.h
index ca1db4b92c32..a4373fc687bd 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched/task.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/task.h
@@ -226,15 +226,18 @@ static inline struct vm_struct *task_stack_vm_area(const struct task_struct *t)
  * neither inside nor outside.
  */
 static inline void task_lock(struct task_struct *p)
+	__acquires(&p->alloc_lock)
 {
 	spin_lock(&p->alloc_lock);
 }
 
 static inline void task_unlock(struct task_struct *p)
+	__releases(&p->alloc_lock)
 {
 	spin_unlock(&p->alloc_lock);
 }
 
-DEFINE_GUARD(task_lock, struct task_struct *, task_lock(_T), task_unlock(_T))
+DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(task_lock, struct task_struct, task_lock(_T->lock), task_unlock(_T->lock))
+DECLARE_LOCK_GUARD_1_ATTRS(task_lock, __assumes_cap(_T->alloc_lock), /* */)
 
 #endif /* _LINUX_SCHED_TASK_H */
diff --git a/include/linux/sched/wake_q.h b/include/linux/sched/wake_q.h
index 0f28b4623ad4..765bbc3d54be 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched/wake_q.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched/wake_q.h
@@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ extern void wake_up_q(struct wake_q_head *head);
 /* Spin unlock helpers to unlock and call wake_up_q with preempt disabled */
 static inline
 void raw_spin_unlock_wake(raw_spinlock_t *lock, struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
+	__releases(lock)
 {
 	guard(preempt)();
 	raw_spin_unlock(lock);
@@ -77,6 +78,7 @@ void raw_spin_unlock_wake(raw_spinlock_t *lock, struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
 
 static inline
 void raw_spin_unlock_irq_wake(raw_spinlock_t *lock, struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
+	__releases(lock)
 {
 	guard(preempt)();
 	raw_spin_unlock_irq(lock);
@@ -89,6 +91,7 @@ void raw_spin_unlock_irq_wake(raw_spinlock_t *lock, struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
 static inline
 void raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_wake(raw_spinlock_t *lock, unsigned long flags,
 				     struct wake_q_head *wake_q)
+	__releases(lock)
 {
 	guard(preempt)();
 	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags);
diff --git a/kernel/sched/Makefile b/kernel/sched/Makefile
index 8ae86371ddcd..8603987ce4c1 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/Makefile
+++ b/kernel/sched/Makefile
@@ -1,5 +1,8 @@
 # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
 
+CAPABILITY_ANALYSIS_core.o := y
+CAPABILITY_ANALYSIS_fair.o := y
+
 # The compilers are complaining about unused variables inside an if(0) scope
 # block. This is daft, shut them up.
 ccflags-y += $(call cc-disable-warning, unused-but-set-variable)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 81c6df746df1..0182d0246f44 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -664,16 +664,17 @@ void double_rq_lock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
 	raw_spin_rq_lock(rq1);
 	if (__rq_lockp(rq1) != __rq_lockp(rq2))
 		raw_spin_rq_lock_nested(rq2, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
+	else
+		__acquire_cap(__rq_lockp(rq2)); /* fake acquire */
 
 	double_rq_clock_clear_update(rq1, rq2);
 }
 #endif
 
 /*
- * __task_rq_lock - lock the rq @p resides on.
+ * ___task_rq_lock - lock the rq @p resides on.
  */
-struct rq *__task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__acquires(rq->lock)
+struct rq *___task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf)
 {
 	struct rq *rq;
 
@@ -696,9 +697,7 @@ struct rq *__task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf)
 /*
  * task_rq_lock - lock p->pi_lock and lock the rq @p resides on.
  */
-struct rq *task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__acquires(p->pi_lock)
-	__acquires(rq->lock)
+struct rq *_task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf)
 {
 	struct rq *rq;
 
@@ -2494,6 +2493,7 @@ static inline bool is_cpu_allowed(struct task_struct *p, int cpu)
  */
 static struct rq *move_queued_task(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf,
 				   struct task_struct *p, int new_cpu)
+	__must_hold(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	lockdep_assert_rq_held(rq);
 
@@ -2540,6 +2540,7 @@ struct set_affinity_pending {
  */
 static struct rq *__migrate_task(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf,
 				 struct task_struct *p, int dest_cpu)
+	__must_hold(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	/* Affinity changed (again). */
 	if (!is_cpu_allowed(p, dest_cpu))
@@ -2576,6 +2577,12 @@ static int migration_cpu_stop(void *data)
 	 */
 	flush_smp_call_function_queue();
 
+	/*
+	 * We may change the underlying rq, but the locks held will
+	 * appropriately be "transferred" when switching.
+	 */
+	capability_unsafe_alias(rq);
+
 	raw_spin_lock(&p->pi_lock);
 	rq_lock(rq, &rf);
 
@@ -2685,6 +2692,8 @@ int push_cpu_stop(void *arg)
 	if (!lowest_rq)
 		goto out_unlock;
 
+	lockdep_assert_rq_held(lowest_rq);
+
 	// XXX validate p is still the highest prio task
 	if (task_rq(p) == rq) {
 		move_queued_task_locked(rq, lowest_rq, p);
@@ -2930,8 +2939,7 @@ void release_user_cpus_ptr(struct task_struct *p)
  */
 static int affine_move_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf,
 			    int dest_cpu, unsigned int flags)
-	__releases(rq->lock)
-	__releases(p->pi_lock)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock, &p->pi_lock)
 {
 	struct set_affinity_pending my_pending = { }, *pending = NULL;
 	bool stop_pending, complete = false;
@@ -3079,8 +3087,7 @@ static int __set_cpus_allowed_ptr_locked(struct task_struct *p,
 					 struct affinity_context *ctx,
 					 struct rq *rq,
 					 struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__releases(rq->lock)
-	__releases(p->pi_lock)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock, &p->pi_lock)
 {
 	const struct cpumask *cpu_allowed_mask = task_cpu_possible_mask(p);
 	const struct cpumask *cpu_valid_mask = cpu_active_mask;
@@ -4400,29 +4407,30 @@ static bool __task_needs_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p)
  */
 int task_call_func(struct task_struct *p, task_call_f func, void *arg)
 {
-	struct rq *rq = NULL;
 	struct rq_flags rf;
 	int ret;
 
 	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&p->pi_lock, rf.flags);
 
-	if (__task_needs_rq_lock(p))
-		rq = __task_rq_lock(p, &rf);
+	if (__task_needs_rq_lock(p)) {
+		struct rq *rq = __task_rq_lock(p, &rf);
 
-	/*
-	 * At this point the task is pinned; either:
-	 *  - blocked and we're holding off wakeups	 (pi->lock)
-	 *  - woken, and we're holding off enqueue	 (rq->lock)
-	 *  - queued, and we're holding off schedule	 (rq->lock)
-	 *  - running, and we're holding off de-schedule (rq->lock)
-	 *
-	 * The called function (@func) can use: task_curr(), p->on_rq and
-	 * p->__state to differentiate between these states.
-	 */
-	ret = func(p, arg);
+		/*
+		 * At this point the task is pinned; either:
+		 *  - blocked and we're holding off wakeups	 (pi->lock)
+		 *  - woken, and we're holding off enqueue	 (rq->lock)
+		 *  - queued, and we're holding off schedule	 (rq->lock)
+		 *  - running, and we're holding off de-schedule (rq->lock)
+		 *
+		 * The called function (@func) can use: task_curr(), p->on_rq and
+		 * p->__state to differentiate between these states.
+		 */
+		ret = func(p, arg);
 
-	if (rq)
 		rq_unlock(rq, &rf);
+	} else {
+		ret = func(p, arg);
+	}
 
 	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&p->pi_lock, rf.flags);
 	return ret;
@@ -5118,6 +5126,8 @@ static inline void __balance_callbacks(struct rq *rq)
 
 static inline void
 prepare_lock_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next, struct rq_flags *rf)
+	__releases(__rq_lockp(rq))
+	__acquires(__rq_lockp(this_rq()))
 {
 	/*
 	 * Since the runqueue lock will be released by the next
@@ -5131,9 +5141,15 @@ prepare_lock_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *next, struct rq_flags *rf
 	/* this is a valid case when another task releases the spinlock */
 	rq_lockp(rq)->owner = next;
 #endif
+	/*
+	 * Model the rq reference switcheroo.
+	 */
+	__release(__rq_lockp(rq));
+	__acquire(__rq_lockp(this_rq()));
 }
 
 static inline void finish_lock_switch(struct rq *rq)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	/*
 	 * If we are tracking spinlock dependencies then we have to
@@ -5189,6 +5205,7 @@ static inline void kmap_local_sched_in(void)
 static inline void
 prepare_task_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev,
 		    struct task_struct *next)
+	__must_hold(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	kcov_prepare_switch(prev);
 	sched_info_switch(rq, prev, next);
@@ -5220,7 +5237,7 @@ prepare_task_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev,
  * because prev may have moved to another CPU.
  */
 static struct rq *finish_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev)
-	__releases(rq->lock)
+	__releases(__rq_lockp(this_rq()))
 {
 	struct rq *rq = this_rq();
 	struct mm_struct *mm = rq->prev_mm;
@@ -5308,7 +5325,7 @@ static struct rq *finish_task_switch(struct task_struct *prev)
  * @prev: the thread we just switched away from.
  */
 asmlinkage __visible void schedule_tail(struct task_struct *prev)
-	__releases(rq->lock)
+	__releases(&this_rq()->__lock)
 {
 	/*
 	 * New tasks start with FORK_PREEMPT_COUNT, see there and
@@ -5340,6 +5357,7 @@ asmlinkage __visible void schedule_tail(struct task_struct *prev)
 static __always_inline struct rq *
 context_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev,
 	       struct task_struct *next, struct rq_flags *rf)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	prepare_task_switch(rq, prev, next);
 
@@ -6026,6 +6044,7 @@ static void prev_balance(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev,
  */
 static inline struct task_struct *
 __pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
+	__must_hold(__rq_lockp(rq))
 {
 	const struct sched_class *class;
 	struct task_struct *p;
@@ -6118,6 +6137,7 @@ static void queue_core_balance(struct rq *rq);
 
 static struct task_struct *
 pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
+	__must_hold(__rq_lockp(rq))
 {
 	struct task_struct *next, *p, *max = NULL;
 	const struct cpumask *smt_mask;
@@ -6562,6 +6582,7 @@ static inline void sched_core_cpu_dying(unsigned int cpu) {}
 
 static struct task_struct *
 pick_next_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
+	__must_hold(__rq_lockp(rq))
 {
 	return __pick_next_task(rq, prev, rf);
 }
@@ -8004,6 +8025,12 @@ static int __balance_push_cpu_stop(void *arg)
 	struct rq_flags rf;
 	int cpu;
 
+	/*
+	 * We may change the underlying rq, but the locks held will
+	 * appropriately be "transferred" when switching.
+	 */
+	capability_unsafe_alias(rq);
+
 	raw_spin_lock_irq(&p->pi_lock);
 	rq_lock(rq, &rf);
 
@@ -8031,6 +8058,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpu_stop_work, push_work);
  * effective when the hotplug motion is down.
  */
 static void balance_push(struct rq *rq)
+	__must_hold(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	struct task_struct *push_task = rq->curr;
 
diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
index 7a14da5396fb..260158287ddb 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -4842,7 +4842,8 @@ static inline unsigned long cfs_rq_load_avg(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq)
 	return cfs_rq->avg.load_avg;
 }
 
-static int sched_balance_newidle(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq_flags *rf);
+static int sched_balance_newidle(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
+	__must_hold(__rq_lockp(this_rq));
 
 static inline unsigned long task_util(struct task_struct *p)
 {
@@ -8737,6 +8738,7 @@ static void set_cpus_allowed_fair(struct task_struct *p, struct affinity_context
 
 static int
 balance_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
+	__must_hold(__rq_lockp(rq))
 {
 	if (sched_fair_runnable(rq))
 		return 1;
@@ -8884,6 +8886,7 @@ static void set_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, bool first)
 
 struct task_struct *
 pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf)
+	__must_hold(__rq_lockp(rq))
 {
 	struct sched_entity *se;
 	struct task_struct *p;
@@ -8970,6 +8973,7 @@ pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, struct rq_flags *rf
 }
 
 static struct task_struct *__pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev)
+	__must_hold(__rq_lockp(rq))
 {
 	return pick_next_task_fair(rq, prev, NULL);
 }
diff --git a/kernel/sched/sched.h b/kernel/sched/sched.h
index 83e3aa917142..0da7c8b89030 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/sched.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/sched.h
@@ -1343,8 +1343,13 @@ static inline bool is_migration_disabled(struct task_struct *p)
 
 DECLARE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED(struct rq, runqueues);
 
+static __always_inline struct rq *__this_rq(void)
+{
+	return this_cpu_ptr(&runqueues);
+}
+
 #define cpu_rq(cpu)		(&per_cpu(runqueues, (cpu)))
-#define this_rq()		this_cpu_ptr(&runqueues)
+#define this_rq()		__this_rq()
 #define task_rq(p)		cpu_rq(task_cpu(p))
 #define cpu_curr(cpu)		(cpu_rq(cpu)->curr)
 #define raw_rq()		raw_cpu_ptr(&runqueues)
@@ -1473,11 +1478,13 @@ static inline bool sched_core_disabled(void)
 }
 
 static inline raw_spinlock_t *rq_lockp(struct rq *rq)
+	__returns_cap(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	return &rq->__lock;
 }
 
 static inline raw_spinlock_t *__rq_lockp(struct rq *rq)
+	__returns_cap(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	return &rq->__lock;
 }
@@ -1519,32 +1526,42 @@ static inline bool rt_group_sched_enabled(void)
 #endif /* CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED */
 
 static inline void lockdep_assert_rq_held(struct rq *rq)
+	__assumes_cap(__rq_lockp(rq))
 {
 	lockdep_assert_held(__rq_lockp(rq));
 }
 
-extern void raw_spin_rq_lock_nested(struct rq *rq, int subclass);
-extern bool raw_spin_rq_trylock(struct rq *rq);
-extern void raw_spin_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq);
+extern void raw_spin_rq_lock_nested(struct rq *rq, int subclass)
+	__acquires(&rq->__lock);
+
+extern bool raw_spin_rq_trylock(struct rq *rq)
+	__cond_acquires(true, &rq->__lock);
+
+extern void raw_spin_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock);
 
 static inline void raw_spin_rq_lock(struct rq *rq)
+	__acquires(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	raw_spin_rq_lock_nested(rq, 0);
 }
 
 static inline void raw_spin_rq_lock_irq(struct rq *rq)
+	__acquires(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	local_irq_disable();
 	raw_spin_rq_lock(rq);
 }
 
 static inline void raw_spin_rq_unlock_irq(struct rq *rq)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
 	local_irq_enable();
 }
 
 static inline unsigned long _raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave(struct rq *rq)
+	__acquires(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	unsigned long flags;
 
@@ -1555,6 +1572,7 @@ static inline unsigned long _raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave(struct rq *rq)
 }
 
 static inline void raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore(struct rq *rq, unsigned long flags)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
 	local_irq_restore(flags);
@@ -1805,17 +1823,15 @@ static inline void rq_repin_lock(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
 	rq->clock_update_flags |= rf->clock_update_flags;
 }
 
-extern
-struct rq *__task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__acquires(rq->lock);
+#define __task_rq_lock(...) __acquire_ret(___task_rq_lock(__VA_ARGS__), &__ret->__lock)
+extern struct rq *___task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf) __acquires_ret;
 
-extern
-struct rq *task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__acquires(p->pi_lock)
-	__acquires(rq->lock);
+#define task_rq_lock(...) __acquire_ret(_task_rq_lock(__VA_ARGS__), &__ret->__lock)
+extern struct rq *_task_rq_lock(struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf)
+	__acquires(&p->pi_lock) __acquires_ret;
 
 static inline void __task_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__releases(rq->lock)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf);
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
@@ -1823,8 +1839,7 @@ static inline void __task_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
 
 static inline void
 task_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__releases(rq->lock)
-	__releases(p->pi_lock)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock, &p->pi_lock)
 {
 	rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf);
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
@@ -1835,44 +1850,45 @@ DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(task_rq_lock, struct task_struct,
 		    _T->rq = task_rq_lock(_T->lock, &_T->rf),
 		    task_rq_unlock(_T->rq, _T->lock, &_T->rf),
 		    struct rq *rq; struct rq_flags rf)
+DECLARE_LOCK_GUARD_1_ATTRS(task_rq_lock, __assumes_cap(_T->pi_lock), /* */)
 
 static inline void rq_lock_irqsave(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__acquires(rq->lock)
+	__acquires(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	raw_spin_rq_lock_irqsave(rq, rf->flags);
 	rq_pin_lock(rq, rf);
 }
 
 static inline void rq_lock_irq(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__acquires(rq->lock)
+	__acquires(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	raw_spin_rq_lock_irq(rq);
 	rq_pin_lock(rq, rf);
 }
 
 static inline void rq_lock(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__acquires(rq->lock)
+	__acquires(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	raw_spin_rq_lock(rq);
 	rq_pin_lock(rq, rf);
 }
 
 static inline void rq_unlock_irqrestore(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__releases(rq->lock)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf);
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock_irqrestore(rq, rf->flags);
 }
 
 static inline void rq_unlock_irq(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__releases(rq->lock)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf);
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock_irq(rq);
 }
 
 static inline void rq_unlock(struct rq *rq, struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__releases(rq->lock)
+	__releases(&rq->__lock)
 {
 	rq_unpin_lock(rq, rf);
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq);
@@ -1883,18 +1899,24 @@ DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(rq_lock, struct rq,
 		    rq_unlock(_T->lock, &_T->rf),
 		    struct rq_flags rf)
 
+DECLARE_LOCK_GUARD_1_ATTRS(rq_lock, __assumes_cap(_T->__lock), /* */);
+
 DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(rq_lock_irq, struct rq,
 		    rq_lock_irq(_T->lock, &_T->rf),
 		    rq_unlock_irq(_T->lock, &_T->rf),
 		    struct rq_flags rf)
 
+DECLARE_LOCK_GUARD_1_ATTRS(rq_lock_irq, __assumes_cap(_T->__lock), /* */);
+
 DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(rq_lock_irqsave, struct rq,
 		    rq_lock_irqsave(_T->lock, &_T->rf),
 		    rq_unlock_irqrestore(_T->lock, &_T->rf),
 		    struct rq_flags rf)
 
-static inline struct rq *this_rq_lock_irq(struct rq_flags *rf)
-	__acquires(rq->lock)
+DECLARE_LOCK_GUARD_1_ATTRS(rq_lock_irqsave, __assumes_cap(_T->__lock), /* */);
+
+#define this_rq_lock_irq(...) __acquire_ret(_this_rq_lock_irq(__VA_ARGS__), &__ret->__lock)
+static inline struct rq *_this_rq_lock_irq(struct rq_flags *rf) __acquires_ret
 {
 	struct rq *rq;
 
@@ -2927,9 +2949,15 @@ static inline void double_rq_clock_clear_update(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
 #define DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_2(name, type, _lock, _unlock, ...)				\
 __DEFINE_UNLOCK_GUARD(name, type, _unlock, type *lock2; __VA_ARGS__)			\
 static inline class_##name##_t class_##name##_constructor(type *lock, type *lock2)	\
+	__no_capability_analysis							\
 { class_##name##_t _t = { .lock = lock, .lock2 = lock2 }, *_T = &_t;			\
   _lock; return _t; }
 
+#define DECLARE_LOCK_GUARD_2_ATTRS(_name, _lock, _unlock) \
+static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##_constructor(lock_##_name##_t *_T1, \
+							    lock_##_name##_t *_T2) _lock; \
+static inline void class_##_name##_destructor(class_##_name##_t *_T) _unlock
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 
 static inline bool rq_order_less(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
@@ -2958,7 +2986,8 @@ static inline bool rq_order_less(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
 	return rq1->cpu < rq2->cpu;
 }
 
-extern void double_rq_lock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2);
+extern void double_rq_lock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
+	__acquires(&rq1->__lock, &rq2->__lock);
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPTION
 
@@ -2971,9 +3000,8 @@ extern void double_rq_lock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2);
  * also adds more overhead and therefore may reduce throughput.
  */
 static inline int _double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
-	__releases(this_rq->lock)
-	__acquires(busiest->lock)
-	__acquires(this_rq->lock)
+	__must_hold(&this_rq->__lock)
+	__acquires(&busiest->__lock)
 {
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(this_rq);
 	double_rq_lock(this_rq, busiest);
@@ -2990,9 +3018,8 @@ static inline int _double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
  * regardless of entry order into the function.
  */
 static inline int _double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
-	__releases(this_rq->lock)
-	__acquires(busiest->lock)
-	__acquires(this_rq->lock)
+	__must_hold(&this_rq->__lock)
+	__acquires(&busiest->__lock)
 {
 	if (__rq_lockp(this_rq) == __rq_lockp(busiest) ||
 	    likely(raw_spin_rq_trylock(busiest))) {
@@ -3018,6 +3045,8 @@ static inline int _double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
  * double_lock_balance - lock the busiest runqueue, this_rq is locked already.
  */
 static inline int double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
+	__must_hold(&this_rq->__lock)
+	__acquires(&busiest->__lock)
 {
 	lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
 
@@ -3025,14 +3054,17 @@ static inline int double_lock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
 }
 
 static inline void double_unlock_balance(struct rq *this_rq, struct rq *busiest)
-	__releases(busiest->lock)
+	__releases(&busiest->__lock)
 {
 	if (__rq_lockp(this_rq) != __rq_lockp(busiest))
 		raw_spin_rq_unlock(busiest);
+	else
+		__release(__rq_lockp(busiest)); /* fake release */
 	lock_set_subclass(&__rq_lockp(this_rq)->dep_map, 0, _RET_IP_);
 }
 
 static inline void double_lock(spinlock_t *l1, spinlock_t *l2)
+	__acquires(l1, l2)
 {
 	if (l1 > l2)
 		swap(l1, l2);
@@ -3042,6 +3074,7 @@ static inline void double_lock(spinlock_t *l1, spinlock_t *l2)
 }
 
 static inline void double_lock_irq(spinlock_t *l1, spinlock_t *l2)
+	__acquires(l1, l2)
 {
 	if (l1 > l2)
 		swap(l1, l2);
@@ -3051,6 +3084,7 @@ static inline void double_lock_irq(spinlock_t *l1, spinlock_t *l2)
 }
 
 static inline void double_raw_lock(raw_spinlock_t *l1, raw_spinlock_t *l2)
+	__acquires(l1, l2)
 {
 	if (l1 > l2)
 		swap(l1, l2);
@@ -3060,6 +3094,7 @@ static inline void double_raw_lock(raw_spinlock_t *l1, raw_spinlock_t *l2)
 }
 
 static inline void double_raw_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *l1, raw_spinlock_t *l2)
+	__releases(l1, l2)
 {
 	raw_spin_unlock(l1);
 	raw_spin_unlock(l2);
@@ -3069,6 +3104,8 @@ DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_2(double_raw_spinlock, raw_spinlock_t,
 		    double_raw_lock(_T->lock, _T->lock2),
 		    double_raw_unlock(_T->lock, _T->lock2))
 
+DECLARE_LOCK_GUARD_2_ATTRS(double_raw_spinlock, __assumes_cap(_T1) __assumes_cap(_T2), /* */);
+
 /*
  * double_rq_unlock - safely unlock two runqueues
  *
@@ -3076,13 +3113,12 @@ DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_2(double_raw_spinlock, raw_spinlock_t,
  * you need to do so manually after calling.
  */
 static inline void double_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
-	__releases(rq1->lock)
-	__releases(rq2->lock)
+	__releases(&rq1->__lock, &rq2->__lock)
 {
 	if (__rq_lockp(rq1) != __rq_lockp(rq2))
 		raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq2);
 	else
-		__release(rq2->lock);
+		__release(&rq2->__lock); /* fake release */
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq1);
 }
 
@@ -3100,8 +3136,7 @@ extern bool sched_smp_initialized;
  * you need to do so manually before calling.
  */
 static inline void double_rq_lock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
-	__acquires(rq1->lock)
-	__acquires(rq2->lock)
+	__acquires(&rq1->__lock, &rq2->__lock)
 {
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(!irqs_disabled());
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(rq1 != rq2);
@@ -3117,8 +3152,7 @@ static inline void double_rq_lock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
  * you need to do so manually after calling.
  */
 static inline void double_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq1, struct rq *rq2)
-	__releases(rq1->lock)
-	__releases(rq2->lock)
+	__releases(&rq1->__lock, &rq2->__lock)
 {
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(rq1 != rq2);
 	raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq1);
diff --git a/scripts/capability-analysis-suppression.txt b/scripts/capability-analysis-suppression.txt
index 95fb0b65a8e6..7ecd888ac522 100644
--- a/scripts/capability-analysis-suppression.txt
+++ b/scripts/capability-analysis-suppression.txt
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ src:*include/linux/refcount.h=emit
 src:*include/linux/rhashtable.h=emit
 src:*include/linux/rwlock*.h=emit
 src:*include/linux/rwsem.h=emit
+src:*include/linux/sched*=emit
 src:*include/linux/seqlock*.h=emit
 src:*include/linux/spinlock*.h=emit
 src:*include/linux/srcu*.h=emit
-- 
2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog

      parent reply	other threads:[~2025-08-06 13:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-04  9:20 [PATCH v2 00/34] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 01/34] compiler_types: Move lock checking attributes to compiler-capability-analysis.h Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:26   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-05  8:36   ` Dan Carpenter
2025-03-05  9:13     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-05  9:27       ` Dan Carpenter
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 02/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Add infrastructure for Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04 15:29   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-04 16:05     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 03/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Add test stub Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:52   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-05  0:03     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 04/34] Documentation: Add documentation for Compiler-Based Capability Analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 05/34] checkpatch: Warn about capability_unsafe() without comment Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 06/34] cleanup: Basic compatibility with capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04 12:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-04 13:09     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:57   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 07/34] lockdep: Annotate lockdep assertions for " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 08/34] locking/rwlock, spinlock: Support Clang's " Marco Elver
2025-03-04 14:30   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 09/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Change __cond_acquires to take return value Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 10/34] locking/mutex: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 11/34] locking/seqlock: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 12/34] bit_spinlock: Include missing <asm/processor.h> Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 13/34] bit_spinlock: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 14/34] rcu: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 15/34] srcu: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 16/34] kref: Add capability-analysis annotations Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 17/34] locking/rwsem: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 18/34] locking/local_lock: Include missing headers Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 19/34] locking/local_lock: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 20/34] locking/ww_mutex: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 21/34] debugfs: Make debugfs_cancellation a capability struct Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 22/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Remove Sparse support Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 23/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Remove __cond_lock() function-like helper Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:25   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 24/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Introduce header suppressions Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 25/34] compiler: Let data_race() imply disabled capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 26/34] kfence: Enable " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 27/34] kcov: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 28/34] stackdepot: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 29/34] rhashtable: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 30/34] printk: Move locking annotation to printk.c Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 31/34] drivers/tty: Enable capability analysis for core files Marco Elver
2025-03-05  9:15   ` Jiri Slaby
2025-03-05  9:26     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 32/34] security/tomoyo: Enable capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 33/34] crypto: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 34/34] MAINTAINERS: Add entry for Capability Analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:18   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-04 11:21 ` [PATCH v2 00/34] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-04 11:43   ` Marco Elver
2025-03-05 11:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-05 15:27   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-05 16:16     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-06 13:36   ` Marco Elver [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=aJNaUwoDjuGfplLm@elver.google.com \
    --to=elver@google.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=justinstitt@google.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=morbo@google.com \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
    --cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=takedakn@nttdata.co.jp \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.