From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "H. Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Dangerous code in cpumask_of_cpu?
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:16:40 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200807081816.40623.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
Hi Christoph/Mike,
Looked at cpumask_of_cpu as introduced in
9f0e8d0400d925c3acd5f4e01dbeb736e4011882 (x86: convert cpumask_of_cpu macro
to allocated array), and I don't think it's safe:
#define cpumask_of_cpu(cpu) \
(*({ \
typeof(_unused_cpumask_arg_) m; \
if (sizeof(m) == sizeof(unsigned long)) { \
m.bits[0] = 1UL<<(cpu); \
} else { \
cpus_clear(m); \
cpu_set((cpu), m); \
} \
&m; \
}))
Referring to &m once out of scope is invalid, and I can't find any evidence
that it's legal here. In particular, the change
b53e921ba1cff8453dc9a87a84052fa12d5b30bd (generic: reduce stack pressure in
sched_affinity) which passes &m to other functions seems highly risky.
I'm surprised this hasn't already hit us, but perhaps gcc isn't as clever as
it could be?
I don't know what the right answer is, but we might need to go to a pool of
cpumask_ts, a get_cpumask_of_cpu() which can sleep and a put_cpumask_of_cpu?
Or maybe a gcc guru can refute this?
Rusty.
next reply other threads:[~2008-07-08 8:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-08 8:16 Rusty Russell [this message]
2008-07-08 8:35 ` Dangerous code in cpumask_of_cpu? Johannes Weiner
2008-07-08 8:54 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-07-08 9:03 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-07-08 9:28 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-07-08 15:29 ` Mike Travis
2008-07-09 2:22 ` Rusty Russell
2008-07-09 14:42 ` Mike Travis
2008-07-08 9:33 ` Rusty Russell
2008-07-08 10:24 ` Andreas Schwab
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=200807081816.40623.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=travis@sgi.com \
/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