Re: [PATCH v4 03/25] notifier: Add atomic/blocking_notifier_has_unique_priority()

Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-12-10T18:20:09Z

On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 7:02 PM Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Add atomic/blocking_notifier_has_unique_priority() helpers which return
> true if given handler has unique priority.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
> ---
> include/linux/notifier.h | 5 +++
> kernel/notifier.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 74 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/notifier.h b/include/linux/notifier.h
> index 924c9d7c8e73..2c4036f225e1 100644
> --- a/include/linux/notifier.h
> +++ b/include/linux/notifier.h
> @@ -175,6 +175,11 @@ int raw_notifier_call_chain_robust(struct raw_notifier_head *nh,
>
> bool blocking_notifier_call_chain_is_empty(struct blocking_notifier_head *nh);
>
> +bool atomic_notifier_has_unique_priority(struct atomic_notifier_head *nh,
> + struct notifier_block *nb);
> +bool blocking_notifier_has_unique_priority(struct blocking_notifier_head *nh,
> + struct notifier_block *nb);
> +
> #define NOTIFY_DONE 0x0000 /* Don't care */
> #define NOTIFY_OK 0x0001 /* Suits me */
> #define NOTIFY_STOP_MASK 0x8000 /* Don't call further */
> diff --git a/kernel/notifier.c b/kernel/notifier.c
> index b20cb7b9b1f0..7a325b742104 100644
> --- a/kernel/notifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/notifier.c
> @@ -122,6 +122,19 @@ static int notifier_call_chain_robust(struct notifier_block **nl,
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int notifier_has_unique_priority(struct notifier_block **nl,
> + struct notifier_block *n)
> +{
> + while (*nl && (*nl)->priority >= n->priority) {
> + if ((*nl)->priority == n->priority && *nl != n)
> + return false;
> +
> + nl = &((*nl)->next);
> + }
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Atomic notifier chain routines. Registration and unregistration
> * use a spinlock, and call_chain is synchronized by RCU (no locks).
> @@ -203,6 +216,30 @@ int atomic_notifier_call_chain(struct atomic_notifier_head *nh,
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(atomic_notifier_call_chain);
> NOKPROBE_SYMBOL(atomic_notifier_call_chain);
>
> +/**
> + * atomic_notifier_has_unique_priority - Checks whether notifier's priority is unique
> + * @nh: Pointer to head of the atomic notifier chain
> + * @n: Entry in notifier chain to check
> + *
> + * Checks whether there is another notifier in the chain with the same priority.
> + * Must be called in process context.
> + *
> + * Returns true if priority is unique, false otherwise.
> + */
> +bool atomic_notifier_has_unique_priority(struct atomic_notifier_head *nh,
> + struct notifier_block *n)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> + bool ret;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&nh->lock, flags);
> + ret = notifier_has_unique_priority(&nh->head, n);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&nh->lock, flags);

This only works if the caller can prevent new entries from being added
to the list at this point or if the caller knows that they cannot be
added for some reason, but the kerneldoc doesn't mention this
limitation.

> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(atomic_notifier_has_unique_priority);
> +
> /*
> * Blocking notifier chain routines. All access to the chain is
> * synchronized by an rwsem.
> @@ -336,6 +373,38 @@ bool blocking_notifier_call_chain_is_empty(struct blocking_notifier_head *nh)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(blocking_notifier_call_chain_is_empty);
>
> +/**
> + * blocking_notifier_has_unique_priority - Checks whether notifier's priority is unique
> + * @nh: Pointer to head of the blocking notifier chain
> + * @n: Entry in notifier chain to check
> + *
> + * Checks whether there is another notifier in the chain with the same priority.
> + * Must be called in process context.
> + *
> + * Returns true if priority is unique, false otherwise.
> + */
> +bool blocking_notifier_has_unique_priority(struct blocking_notifier_head *nh,
> + struct notifier_block *n)
> +{
> + bool ret;
> +
> + /*
> + * This code gets used during boot-up, when task switching is
> + * not yet working and interrupts must remain disabled. At such
> + * times we must not call down_read().
> + */
> + if (system_state != SYSTEM_BOOTING)

No, please don't do this, it makes the whole thing error-prone.

> + down_read(&nh->rwsem);
> +
> + ret = notifier_has_unique_priority(&nh->head, n);
> +
> + if (system_state != SYSTEM_BOOTING)
> + up_read(&nh->rwsem);

And still what if a new entry with a non-unique priority is added to
the chain at this point?

> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(blocking_notifier_has_unique_priority);
> +
> /*
> * Raw notifier chain routines. There is no protection;
> * the caller must provide it. Use at your own risk!
> --
> 2.33.1
>