From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
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>, 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>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 15/24] rcu: Support Clang's capability analysis
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 19:52:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250221185220.GA7373@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aa50d616-fdbb-4c68-86ff-82bb57aaa26a@paulmck-laptop>
On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 10:08:06AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > ... unfortunately even for shared locks, the compiler does not like
> > re-entrancy yet. It's not yet supported, and to fix that I'd have to go
> > and implement that in Clang first before coming back to this.
>
> This would be needed for some types of reader-writer locks, and also for
> reference counting, so here is hoping that such support is forthcoming
> sooner rather than later.
Right, so I read the clang documentation for this feature the other day,
and my take away was that this was all really primitive and lots of work
will need to go into making this more capable before we can cover much
of the more interesting things we do in the kernel.
Notably the whole guarded_by member annotations, which are very cool in
concept, are very primitive in practise and will need much extensions.
To that effect, and because this is basically a static analysis pass
with no codegen implications, I would suggest that we keep the whole
feature limited to the very latest clang version for now and don't
bother supporting older versions at all.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-21 18:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-06 18:09 [PATCH RFC 00/24] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 01/24] compiler_types: Move lock checking attributes to compiler-capability-analysis.h Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:40 ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-06 18:48 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-07 8:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 02/24] compiler-capability-analysis: Rename __cond_lock() to __cond_acquire() Marco Elver
2025-02-07 8:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-07 9:32 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-07 9:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-07 9:50 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 03/24] compiler-capability-analysis: Add infrastructure for Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 04/24] compiler-capability-analysis: Add test stub Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 05/24] Documentation: Add documentation for Compiler-Based Capability Analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 06/24] checkpatch: Warn about capability_unsafe() without comment Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 07/24] cleanup: Basic compatibility with capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 21:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-06 22:01 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 08/24] lockdep: Annotate lockdep assertions for " Marco Elver
2025-02-10 18:09 ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-10 18:23 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-10 18:53 ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-11 13:55 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 09/24] locking/rwlock, spinlock: Support Clang's " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 10/24] compiler-capability-analysis: Change __cond_acquires to take return value Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 11/24] locking/mutex: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-07 8:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-07 20:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 12/24] locking/seqlock: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 13/24] bit_spinlock: Include missing <asm/processor.h> Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 14/24] bit_spinlock: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 15/24] rcu: " Marco Elver
2025-02-20 22:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-20 22:11 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-20 22:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-21 0:16 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-21 1:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-21 17:10 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-21 18:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-21 18:52 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2025-02-21 19:46 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-21 19:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 16/24] srcu: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 17/24] kref: Add capability-analysis annotations Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 18/24] locking/rwsem: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 19/24] locking/local_lock: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 20/24] debugfs: Make debugfs_cancellation a capability struct Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 21/24] kfence: Enable capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 22/24] kcov: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 23/24] stackdepot: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 24/24] rhashtable: " Marco Elver
2025-02-27 7:00 ` [PATCH RFC 00/24] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis Marco Elver
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=20250221185220.GA7373@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--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=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox