Re: [PATCH v3] Fixing directly deferencing a __rcu pointer warning

From: Abhinav Singh
Date: Sat Oct 28 2023 - 16:55:02 EST


On 10/28/23 17:50, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 03:52:47PM +0530, Abhinav Singh wrote:
This patch fixes the warning about directly dereferencing a pointer
tagged with __rcu annotation.

Dereferencing the pointers tagged with __rcu directly should
always be avoided according to the docs. There is a rcu helper
function rcu_dereference(...) to use when dereferencing a __rcu
pointer. This function returns the non __rcu tagged pointer which
can be dereferenced just like a normal pointer.

Signed-off-by: Abhinav Singh <singhabhinav9051571833@xxxxxxxxx>
---
v1 -> v2 : added rcu_dereference(...) at line 2694
v2 -> v3 : added rcu_dereference(...) at line 2695

kernel/fork.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
index 10917c3e1f03..e78649974669 100644
--- a/kernel/fork.c
+++ b/kernel/fork.c
@@ -2369,7 +2369,7 @@ __latent_entropy struct task_struct *copy_process(
retval = -EAGAIN;
if (is_rlimit_overlimit(task_ucounts(p), UCOUNT_RLIMIT_NPROC, rlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC))) {
- if (p->real_cred->user != INIT_USER &&
+ if (rcu_dereference(p->real_cred)->user != INIT_USER &&
!capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE) && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
goto bad_fork_cleanup_count;
}
@@ -2690,9 +2690,9 @@ __latent_entropy struct task_struct *copy_process(
* tasklist_lock with adding child to the process tree
* for propagate_has_child_subreaper optimization.
*/
- p->signal->has_child_subreaper = p->real_parent->signal->has_child_subreaper ||
- p->real_parent->signal->is_child_subreaper;
- list_add_tail(&p->sibling, &p->real_parent->children);
+ p->signal->has_child_subreaper = rcu_dereference(p->real_parent)->signal->has_child_subreaper ||
+ rcu_dereference(p->real_parent)->signal->is_child_subreaper;
+ list_add_tail(&p->sibling, &rcu_dereference(p->real_parent)->children);
list_add_tail_rcu(&p->tasks, &init_task.tasks);
attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_TGID);
attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_PGID);
--
2.39.2


You seem to just ignore review comments. NAK. I'm not going to review this anymore.


I m really sorry for ignorance and careless behaviour. This is completely my fault, a maintainer has to do a lot of work and he cant correct me all the times. On my defense I will only say that I was really confused about a thing, instead of asking you question, I thought of sending in another patch with some more information is a better choice then a clearing my confusion by sending in a extra mail. You were very concise and clear about your comments but MY stupidity was on another level today. I m sorry for ignorant behaviour. And also thanks and appreciate a lot for reviewing this patch till now to all the maintainers.

Not sure if this patch will be reviewed again or not, but I think I should answer the queries.

The last patch I sent, I tested with `lockdep` on (I hope "test with `lockdep on`" means booting the kernel with lockdep enabled),
with these config options `CONFIG_PROVE_RCU` and `CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING` enabled and it booted just fine. To confirm if lockdep was really enabled I found these paths inside the qemu virtual envirnoment
/proc/lockdep
/proc/lockdep_chains
/proc/lockdep_stat
/proc/locks
/proc/lock_stats

I tested the above kernel using qemu with this command
qemu-system-x86_64 \
-m 2G \
-smp 2 \
-kernel /home/abhinav/linux_work/linux/arch/x86/boot/bzImage \
-append "console=ttyS0 root=/dev/sda earlyprintk=serial net.ifnames=0" \
-drive file=/home/abhinav/linux_work/boot_images/bullseye.img,format=raw \
-net user,host=10.0.2.10,hostfwd=tcp:127.0.0.1:10021-:22 \
-net nic,model=e1000 \
-enable-kvm \
-nographic \
-pidfile vm.pid \
2>&1 | tee vm.log

I did not get warning `the run-time "suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage"` as mentioned by Oleg Nesterov, which mean rcu_dereference(...) it called inside of rcu read side critical sections.