Building the Linux kernel with Clang and LLVM
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
	Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
	Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@nttdata.co.jp>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
	Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	llvm@lists.linux.dev, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/34] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 07:27:32 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <76f8c8e1-5f32-4f31-a960-9285a15340e3@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250305112041.GA16878@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On 3/5/25 3:20 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> index 248416ecd01c..d27607d9c2dc 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> @@ -945,6 +945,7 @@ static inline unsigned int blk_boundary_sectors_left(sector_t offset,
>    */
>   static inline struct queue_limits
>   queue_limits_start_update(struct request_queue *q)
> +	__acquires(q->limits_lock)
>   {
>   	mutex_lock(&q->limits_lock);
>   	return q->limits;
> @@ -965,6 +966,7 @@ int blk_validate_limits(struct queue_limits *lim);
>    * starting update.
>    */
>   static inline void queue_limits_cancel_update(struct request_queue *q)
> +	__releases(q->limits_lock)
>   {
>   	mutex_unlock(&q->limits_lock);
>   }

The above is incomplete. Here is what I came up with myself:

diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
index 248416ecd01c..0d011270e642 100644
--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -945,15 +945,19 @@ static inline unsigned int 
blk_boundary_sectors_left(sector_t offset,
   */
  static inline struct queue_limits
  queue_limits_start_update(struct request_queue *q)
+       ACQUIRE(q->limits_lock)
  {
         mutex_lock(&q->limits_lock);
         return q->limits;
  }
  int queue_limits_commit_update_frozen(struct request_queue *q,
-               struct queue_limits *lim);
+               struct queue_limits *lim)
+       RELEASE(q->limits_lock);
  int queue_limits_commit_update(struct request_queue *q,
-               struct queue_limits *lim);
-int queue_limits_set(struct request_queue *q, struct queue_limits *lim);
+               struct queue_limits *lim)
+       RELEASE(q->limits_lock);
+int queue_limits_set(struct request_queue *q, struct queue_limits *lim)
+       EXCLUDES(q->limits_lock);
  int blk_validate_limits(struct queue_limits *lim);

  /**
@@ -965,6 +969,7 @@ int blk_validate_limits(struct queue_limits *lim);
   * starting update.
   */
  static inline void queue_limits_cancel_update(struct request_queue *q)
+       RELEASE(q->limits_lock)
  {
         mutex_unlock(&q->limits_lock);
  }

> diff --git a/include/linux/device.h b/include/linux/device.h
> index 80a5b3268986..283fb85d96c8 100644
> --- a/include/linux/device.h
> +++ b/include/linux/device.h
> @@ -1026,21 +1026,25 @@ static inline bool dev_pm_test_driver_flags(struct device *dev, u32 flags)
>   }
>   
>   static inline void device_lock(struct device *dev)
> +	__acquires(dev->mutex)
>   {
>   	mutex_lock(&dev->mutex);
>   }
>   
>   static inline int device_lock_interruptible(struct device *dev)
> +	__cond_acquires(0, dev->mutex)
>   {
>   	return mutex_lock_interruptible(&dev->mutex);
>   }
>   
>   static inline int device_trylock(struct device *dev)
> +	__cond_acquires(true, dev->mutex)
>   {
>   	return mutex_trylock(&dev->mutex);
>   }
>   
>   static inline void device_unlock(struct device *dev)
> +	__releases(dev->mutex)
>   {
>   	mutex_unlock(&dev->mutex);
>   }

I propose to annotate these functions with __no_capability_analysis as a
first step. Review of all callers of these functions in the entire
kernel tree learned me that annotating these functions results in a
significant number of false positives and not to the discovery of any
bugs. The false positives are triggered by conditional locking. An
example of code that triggers false positive thread-safety warnings:

static void ath9k_hif_usb_firmware_fail(struct hif_device_usb *hif_dev)
{
	struct device *dev = &hif_dev->udev->dev;
	struct device *parent = dev->parent;

	complete_all(&hif_dev->fw_done);

	if (parent)
		device_lock(parent);

	device_release_driver(dev);

	if (parent)
		device_unlock(parent);
}

Thanks,

Bart.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-03-05 15:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-04  9:20 [PATCH v2 00/34] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 01/34] compiler_types: Move lock checking attributes to compiler-capability-analysis.h Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:26   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-05  8:36   ` Dan Carpenter
2025-03-05  9:13     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-05  9:27       ` Dan Carpenter
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 02/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Add infrastructure for Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04 15:29   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-04 16:05     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 03/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Add test stub Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:52   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-05  0:03     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 04/34] Documentation: Add documentation for Compiler-Based Capability Analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 05/34] checkpatch: Warn about capability_unsafe() without comment Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 06/34] cleanup: Basic compatibility with capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04 12:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-04 13:09     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:57   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 07/34] lockdep: Annotate lockdep assertions for " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 08/34] locking/rwlock, spinlock: Support Clang's " Marco Elver
2025-03-04 14:30   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 09/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Change __cond_acquires to take return value Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 10/34] locking/mutex: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 11/34] locking/seqlock: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 12/34] bit_spinlock: Include missing <asm/processor.h> Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 13/34] bit_spinlock: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 14/34] rcu: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 15/34] srcu: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 16/34] kref: Add capability-analysis annotations Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 17/34] locking/rwsem: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 18/34] locking/local_lock: Include missing headers Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 19/34] locking/local_lock: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 20/34] locking/ww_mutex: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 21/34] debugfs: Make debugfs_cancellation a capability struct Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 22/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Remove Sparse support Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 23/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Remove __cond_lock() function-like helper Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:25   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 24/34] compiler-capability-analysis: Introduce header suppressions Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 25/34] compiler: Let data_race() imply disabled capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 26/34] kfence: Enable " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 27/34] kcov: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 28/34] stackdepot: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 29/34] rhashtable: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 30/34] printk: Move locking annotation to printk.c Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 31/34] drivers/tty: Enable capability analysis for core files Marco Elver
2025-03-05  9:15   ` Jiri Slaby
2025-03-05  9:26     ` Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 32/34] security/tomoyo: Enable capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 33/34] crypto: " Marco Elver
2025-03-04  9:21 ` [PATCH v2 34/34] MAINTAINERS: Add entry for Capability Analysis Marco Elver
2025-03-04 23:18   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-03-04 11:21 ` [PATCH v2 00/34] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-04 11:43   ` Marco Elver
2025-03-05 11:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-03-05 15:27   ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2025-03-05 16:16     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-08-06 13:36   ` Marco Elver

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=76f8c8e1-5f32-4f31-a960-9285a15340e3@acm.org \
    --to=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=justinstitt@google.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=morbo@google.com \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
    --cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=takedakn@nttdata.co.jp \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --cc=will@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