From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B251AC636CC for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 17:25:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4PB94G4BMYz3cfj for ; Wed, 8 Feb 2023 04:25:02 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=Pb3qC/ed; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=google.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::1134; helo=mail-yw1-x1134.google.com; envelope-from=surenb@google.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=Pb3qC/ed; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-yw1-x1134.google.com (mail-yw1-x1134.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1134]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4PB93D2nhkz3cC1 for ; Wed, 8 Feb 2023 04:24:07 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-yw1-x1134.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-5249a65045aso172281627b3.13 for ; Tue, 07 Feb 2023 09:24:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wY8hb5nZUT6CPxT6UQHAOP5yFiXCDsuAFz5p/YAvGLQ=; b=Pb3qC/edCu+Hdhuxvh6TBPGYHOaJFiLiiDb92+b3hsAKrktXMLCjByGYCVYHnQpMrj weicCOrRJIJoIT6fer6g9jNEjcE8p19ac7zlLhBMuS5AhytpqFS8HzhZ/Quvq35yemQu nuGjWp9herknCbGRi2jNeP/G8KwHMt0KF4T7nfE9ebWsqlxoytJdJVJd+YK2wTxfst3s YiDRQyHlXxz+RrDlsjNEE0kGtlMAPp2GdWOwLpSfkltZjREr7SfLW3bSDuh37mNkpJiJ rK3K2dACeciOJshRN89HTZcg8bk7zWUxYnolBW6KWfy2DbTd7tlzhtqHN6vc6V+htiaY lbZw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=wY8hb5nZUT6CPxT6UQHAOP5yFiXCDsuAFz5p/YAvGLQ=; b=M5AEfhRcwHeUfrbM4upaIjK0YX2N9/If1YmVR08yfThVtaAFBZ6JGzyevmVE6wY+Bg ZLlY1yU9vIAnu3Fq/6iRGLDzRATAi6o5kMFiWlroaGXC7QynG2ytldnpq3t9ah9S6orR TiQANifPK1HNospnnx5ZA4YTHjvcROb8+iPfBUHN1rLSm97GQleiUgn32N8TZctkYES4 OzKmYtxgqF0SexWhbzm9Sl3FXgUpCnEgFKXHVKTdsBVr0aHkJVVyq58NvbJiHpOd3vkr +h83o/tD/y1iAUYaoxH37B3sMrKWT8Ys1VdaTdJ32MUDk/n95L6qbqVjb/5oqW4j//kX 7NhA== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUaqGqdxnt0U+WcIXtftg6t8XLksd2MiyFV64uefIuA3iAw0MON PrmMcivDEPotF7vtul1ys6kC5RWbh/Izst2UhrGDSQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9W8Y0rg7QI82Y3A8eB+oY+UN01O2yggY3Hc3Pg8a19h2sKqu2GnTC09gqwgFsaHf2qGIPVjJ6VaMAwBgtLg2U= X-Received: by 2002:a0d:e808:0:b0:527:b484:aa14 with SMTP id r8-20020a0de808000000b00527b484aa14mr456067ywe.263.1675790643441; Tue, 07 Feb 2023 09:24:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230125233554.153109-1-surenb@google.com> <20230125233554.153109-2-surenb@google.com> <20230125162159.a66e5ef05fecb405e85ffec9@linux-foundation.org> <20230125173449.5472cffc989dfab4b83c491d@linux-foundation.org> <20230126172726.GA682281@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> In-Reply-To: From: Suren Baghdasaryan Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 09:23:52 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] kernel/fork: convert vma assignment to a memcpy To: Marco Elver Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: michel@lespinasse.org, joelaf@google.com, songliubraving@fb.com, mhocko@suse.com, leewalsh@google.com, david@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de, peterx@redhat.com, dhowells@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, edumazet@google.com, jglisse@google.com, punit.agrawal@bytedance.com, will@kernel.org, arjunroy@google.com, dave@stgolabs.net, minchan@google.com, x86@kernel.org, hughd@google.com, willy@infradead.org, gurua@google.com, mingo@redhat.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, rientjes@google.com, axelrasmussen@google.com, kernel-team@android.com, soheil@google.com, "Paul E. McKenney" , jannh@google.com, liam.howlett@oracle.com, shakeelb@google.com, luto@kernel.org, gthelen@google.com, ldufour@linux.ibm.com, vbabka@suse.cz, posk@google.com, lstoakes@gmail.com, peterjung1337@gmail.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kent.overstreet@linux.dev, hughlynch@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, Andrew Morton , tatashin@google.com, mgorman@techsingularity.net Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 9:16 AM Marco Elver wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 09:27AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 05:34:49PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 16:50:01 -0800 Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 4:22 PM Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 15:35:48 -0800 Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Convert vma assignment in vm_area_dup() to a memcpy() to prevent compiler > > > > > > errors when we add a const modifier to vma->vm_flags. > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/kernel/fork.c > > > > > > +++ b/kernel/fork.c > > > > > > @@ -482,7 +482,7 @@ struct vm_area_struct *vm_area_dup(struct vm_area_struct *orig) > > > > > > * orig->shared.rb may be modified concurrently, but the clone > > > > > > * will be reinitialized. > > > > > > */ > > > > > > - *new = data_race(*orig); > > > > > > + memcpy(new, orig, sizeof(*new)); > > > > > > > > > > The data_race() removal is unchangelogged? > > > > > > > > True. I'll add a note in the changelog about that. Ideally I would > > > > like to preserve it but I could not find a way to do that. > > > > > > Perhaps Paul can comment? > > > > > > I wonder if KCSAN knows how to detect this race, given that it's now in > > > a memcpy. I assume so. > > > > I ran an experiment memcpy()ing between a static array and an onstack > > array, and KCSAN did not complain. But maybe I was setting it up wrong. > > > > This is what I did: > > > > long myid = (long)arg; /* different value for each task */ > > static unsigned long z1[10] = { 0 }; > > unsigned long z2[10]; > > > > ... > > > > memcpy(z1, z2, ARRAY_SIZE(z1) * sizeof(z1[0])); > > for (zi = 0; zi < ARRAY_SIZE(z1); zi++) > > z2[zi] += myid; > > memcpy(z2, z1, ARRAY_SIZE(z1) * sizeof(z1[0])); > > > > Adding Marco on CC for his thoughts. > > ( Sorry for not seeing it earlier - just saw this by chance. ) > > memcpy() data races will be detected as of (given a relatively recent > Clang compiler): > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=7c201739beef > > Also beware that the compiler is free to "optimize" things by either > inlining memcpy() (turning an explicit memcpy() into just a bunch of > loads/stores), or outline plain assignments into memcpy() calls. So the > only way to be sure what ends up there is to look at the disassembled > code. > > The data_race() was introduced by: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=cda099b37d716 > > It says: > "vm_area_dup() blindly copies all fields of original VMA to the new one. > This includes coping vm_area_struct::shared.rb which is normally > protected by i_mmap_lock. But this is fine because the read value will > be overwritten on the following __vma_link_file() under proper > protection. Thus, mark it as an intentional data race and insert a few > assertions for the fields that should not be modified concurrently." > > And as far as I can tell this hasn't changed. Thanks for the feedback, Marco! So, IIUC Mel's proposal to use data_race(memcpy(new, orig, sizeof(*new))); is fine in this case, right? Thanks, Suren. > > Thanks, > -- Marco