From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 05/14] ipv4/ip_socketglue: Apply ACCESS_ONCE() to avoid sparse false positive Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:40:08 -0800 Message-ID: <1384562417-817-5-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20131116003946.GA316@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1384562417-817-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: mingo@kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, sbw@mit.edu, "Paul E. McKenney" , "David S. Miller" , Alexey Kuznetsov , James Morris , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , Patrick McHardy , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1384562417-817-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: "Paul E. McKenney" The sparse checking for rcu_assign_pointer() was recently upgraded to reject non-__kernel address spaces. This also rejects __rcu, which is almost always the right thing to do. However, the use in ip_ra_control() is legitimate: It is assigning a pointer to an element from an RCU-protected list, and all elements of this list are already visible to caller. This commit therefore silences this false positive by laundering the pointer using ACCESS_ONCE() as suggested by Eric Dumazet and Josh Triplett. Reported-by: kbuild test robot Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Cc: "David S. Miller" Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov Cc: James Morris Cc: Hideaki YOSHIFUJI Cc: Patrick McHardy Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org --- net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c b/net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c index d9c4f113d709..a0e7f176e9c8 100644 --- a/net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c +++ b/net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c @@ -269,7 +269,8 @@ int ip_ra_control(struct sock *sk, unsigned char on, } /* dont let ip_call_ra_chain() use sk again */ ra->sk = NULL; - rcu_assign_pointer(*rap, ra->next); + /* Both --rcu and visible, so ACCESS_ONCE() is OK. */ + ACCESS_ONCE(*rap) = ra->next; spin_unlock_bh(&ip_ra_lock); if (ra->destructor) -- 1.8.1.5