public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH RFC] Make rcu_dereference_raw() safe for NMI etc.
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 11:55:33 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150202195532.GA2218@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)

As promised/threatened on IRC.

							Thanx, Paul

------------------------------------------------------------------------

rcu: Reverse rcu_dereference_check() conditions

The rcu_dereference_check() family of primitives evaluates the RCU
lockdep expression first, and only then evaluates the expression passed
in.  This works fine normally, but can potentially fail in environments
(such as NMI handlers) where lockdep cannot be invoked.  The problem is
that even if the expression passed in is "1", the compiler would need to
prove that the RCU lockdep expression (rcu_read_lock_held(), for example)
is free of side effects in order to be able to elide it.  Given that
rcu_read_lock_held() is sometimes separately compiled, the compiler cannot
always use this optimization.

This commit therefore reverse the order of evaluation, so that the
expression passed in is evaluated first, and the RCU lockdep expression is
evaluated only if the passed-in expression evaluated to false, courtesy
of the C-language short-circuit boolean evaluation rules.  This compells
the compiler to forego executing the RCU lockdep expression in cases
where the passed-in expression evaluates to "1" at compile time, so that
(for example) rcu_dereference_raw() can be guaranteed to execute safely
withing an NMI handler.

Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index b33aed415872..9d3d0e1d0766 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -731,7 +731,7 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void)
  * annotated as __rcu.
  */
 #define rcu_dereference_check(p, c) \
-	__rcu_dereference_check((p), rcu_read_lock_held() || (c), __rcu)
+	__rcu_dereference_check((p), (c) || rcu_read_lock_held(), __rcu)
 
 /**
  * rcu_dereference_bh_check() - rcu_dereference_bh with debug checking
@@ -741,7 +741,7 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void)
  * This is the RCU-bh counterpart to rcu_dereference_check().
  */
 #define rcu_dereference_bh_check(p, c) \
-	__rcu_dereference_check((p), rcu_read_lock_bh_held() || (c), __rcu)
+	__rcu_dereference_check((p), (c) || rcu_read_lock_bh_held(), __rcu)
 
 /**
  * rcu_dereference_sched_check() - rcu_dereference_sched with debug checking
@@ -751,7 +751,7 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void)
  * This is the RCU-sched counterpart to rcu_dereference_check().
  */
 #define rcu_dereference_sched_check(p, c) \
-	__rcu_dereference_check((p), rcu_read_lock_sched_held() || (c), \
+	__rcu_dereference_check((p), (c) || rcu_read_lock_sched_held(), \
 				__rcu)
 
 #define rcu_dereference_raw(p) rcu_dereference_check(p, 1) /*@@@ needed? @@@*/
diff --git a/include/linux/srcu.h b/include/linux/srcu.h
index 9cfd9623fb03..bdeb4567b71e 100644
--- a/include/linux/srcu.h
+++ b/include/linux/srcu.h
@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ static inline int srcu_read_lock_held(struct srcu_struct *sp)
  * lockdep_is_held() calls.
  */
 #define srcu_dereference_check(p, sp, c) \
-	__rcu_dereference_check((p), srcu_read_lock_held(sp) || (c), __rcu)
+	__rcu_dereference_check((p), (c) || srcu_read_lock_held(sp), __rcu)
 
 /**
  * srcu_dereference - fetch SRCU-protected pointer for later dereferencing


             reply	other threads:[~2015-02-02 19:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-02 19:55 Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2015-02-03 11:00 ` [PATCH RFC] Make rcu_dereference_raw() safe for NMI etc Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-03 13:39   ` Paul E. McKenney

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=20150202195532.GA2218@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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