From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>,
kenchen@google.com,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: broken do_each_pid_{thread,task}
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:47:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081215104716.GB11106@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1wse29roy.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>
On 12/14, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > I'm getting
> > `if (type == PIDTYPE_PID)' is unreachable
> > warning from kernel/exit.c. The preprocessed code looks like:
> > do {
> > struct hlist_node *pos___;
> > if (pgrp != ((void *)0))
> > for (LIST ITERATION) {
> > {
> > if (!((p->state & 4) != 0))
> > continue;
> > retval = 1;
> > break;
> > }
> > if (PIDTYPE_PGID == PIDTYPE_PID)
> > break;
> > }
> > } while (0);
> > and it's obviously wrong.
>
> Actually the test:
> > if (PIDTYPE_PGID == PIDTYPE_PID)
> > break;
> Is technically ok. The compiler should optimize it out instead of warning.
> Although seeing the unexpected corner case it gets us into I think it would
> be good to reconsider this test.
Agreed. This check uglifies the code to fix the theoretical problem.
But, actually do_each_pid_task() is a bit ugly even without this check.
Lets forget about this check for a moment.
Firstly, all hlist_for_each_entry() helpers should be "fixed", we don't
need the second argument. For example, hlist_for_each_entry_rcu() could
be
#define hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(pos, head, member) \
for (pos = (void*)(head)->first; rcu_dereference(pos) && ({ \
prefetch(((struct hlist_node*)pos)->next); \
pos = hlist_entry((void*)pos, typeof(*pos), member); 1; \
}); pos = (void*)(pos)->member.next)
So we can define
#define for_each_pid_task(pid, type, task)
for (task = pid ? (void*)((pid)->tasks + type)->first : NULL; \
rcu_dereference(task) && ({ \
prefetch(((struct hlist_node*)task)->next); \
task = hlist_entry((void*)task, typeof(*task), pids[type].node); 1; \
}); task = (void*)(task)->pids[type].node.next)
Which can be used just
for_each_pid_task(pid, type, task)
do_something(task);
Not that I think it is worth to do, though ;)
We can even restore the ugly special case for PIDTYPE_PID:
#define for_each_pid_task(pid, type, task)
for (task = pid ? (void*)((pid)->tasks + type)->first : NULL; \
rcu_dereference(task) && ({ \
prefetch(((struct hlist_node*)task)->next); \
task = hlist_entry((void*)task, typeof(*task), pids[type].node); 1; }) \
task = (type != PIDTYPE_PID) ? (void*)(task)->pids[type].node.next : NULL)
> > For do_each_pid_thread(), even this code snippet from fs/ioprio.c is broken
> > due to double do {} while expansion:
> > do_each_pid_thread(pgrp, PIDTYPE_PGID, p) {
> > ret = set_task_ioprio(p, ioprio);
> > if (ret)
> > break;
> > } while_each_pid_thread(pgrp, PIDTYPE_PGID, p);
> >
> > Any idea how to get rid of this issue?
>
> The double loop there is certainly an issue. I'm not quite convinced that
> the error handling is correct even with the break statement. But the
> break statement was written when the code was just a single loop, so the
> behavior is definitely not what we intended.
Yes,
> With respect to error handling and IO priorities can we fix the error handling
> by doing what we do when we send a signal to a process group? That is note
> that there was an error, finish processing all of the other processes and then
> return the error?
Personally, I think you are right. But then we should change IOPRIO_WHO_USER
accordingly, imho.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-15 10:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-14 21:59 broken do_each_pid_{thread,task} Jiri Slaby
2008-12-15 1:02 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-12-15 10:47 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2008-12-15 17:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-02-24 13:22 ` Jiri Slaby
2009-02-24 15:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-02-24 16:21 ` Jiri Slaby
2009-02-24 21:49 ` [RFC, PATCH] introduce pid_for_each_task() to replace do_each_pid_task() Oleg Nesterov
2008-12-15 10:24 ` broken do_each_pid_{thread,task} Oleg Nesterov
2008-12-15 10:50 ` Jiri Slaby
2008-12-15 11:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2008-12-15 11:33 ` Jiri Slaby
2008-12-15 11:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-10-12 10:55 ` Jiri Slaby
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=20081215104716.GB11106@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
--cc=kenchen@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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