kernel: audit.c: Add __rcu annotation to RCU pointer
PATCH v3 1/1 kernel: audit.c: Add __rcu annotation to RCU pointer
Add __rcu annotation to RCU-protected global pointer auditd_conn.
auditd_conn is an RCU-protected global pointer,i.e., accessed via RCU methods rcu_dereference() and rcu_assign_pointer(), hence it must be annotated with __rcu for sparse to report warnings/errors correctly.
Fix multiple instances of the sparse error:
error: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces)
---
v3:
- update changelog to be more descriptive
v2:
- fix erroneous RCU pointer initialization
kernel/audit.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
kernel/audit.c +3 -2
@@ -102,12 +102,13 @@ struct audit_net {* This struct is RCU protected; you must either hold the RCU lock for reading * or the associated spinlock for writing. */ -static struct auditd_connection { +struct auditd_connection {struct pid *pid;u32 portid;struct net *net;struct rcu_head rcu; -} *auditd_conn =NULL ; +}; +static struct auditd_connection __rcu *auditd_conn;static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (auditd_conn_lock);/* If audit_rate_limit is non-zero, limit the rate of sending audit records
Signature · 1 line
2.24.0
Good idea to CC the following on RCU patches:
Paul McKenney
Steven Rostedt
(Any others on the RCU maintainers list).
And, the list: [email protected]
Could anyone Ack the patch? Looks safe and straight forward.
Quoted 46 lines · Amol Grover
Add
__rcuannotation to RCU-protected global pointerauditd_conn.
auditd_connis an RCU-protected global pointer,i.e., accessed via RCU methodsrcu_dereference()andrcu_assign_pointer(), hence it must be annotated with__rcufor sparse to report warnings/errors correctly.Fix multiple instances of the sparse error:
error: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces)Reviewed-by Joel Fernandes (Google) <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Amol Grover <[email protected]>---
v3:
- update changelog to be more descriptivev2:
- fix erroneous RCU pointer initializationkernel/audit.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)kernel/audit.c +3
-2@@ -102,12 +102,13 @@ struct audit_net {* This struct is RCU protected; you must either hold the RCU lock for reading * or the associated spinlock for writing. */ -static struct auditd_connection { +struct auditd_connection {struct pid *pid;u32 portid;struct net *net;struct rcu_head rcu; -} *auditd_conn =NULL ; +}; +static struct auditd_connection __rcu *auditd_conn;static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (auditd_conn_lock);/* If audit_rate_limit is non-zero, limit the rate of sending audit records Signature · 1 line
2.24.0
Steven Rostedt
reviewerQuoted 3 lines · On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:19:15 -0500 Joel Fernandes <[email protected]> wrote:
Good idea to CC the following on RCU patches:
Paul McKenney
Steven Rostedt
I'm fine with this if it doesn't cause any rcu splats with sparse. Not sure if use cases of RCU requires RCU maintainers Cc'd. Although we can usually keep people from misusing it ;-)
-- Steve
Quoted 52 lines
(Any others on the RCU maintainers list).
And, the list: [email protected]Could anyone Ack the patch? Looks safe and straight forward.
Quoted 46 lines · Amol Grover
Add
__rcuannotation to RCU-protected global pointerauditd_conn.
auditd_connis an RCU-protected global pointer,i.e., accessed via RCU methodsrcu_dereference()andrcu_assign_pointer(), hence it must be annotated with__rcufor sparse to report warnings/errors correctly.Fix multiple instances of the sparse error:
error: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces)Reviewed-by Joel Fernandes (Google) <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Amol Grover <[email protected]>---
v3:
- update changelog to be more descriptivev2:
- fix erroneous RCU pointer initializationkernel/audit.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)kernel/audit.c +3
-2@@ -102,12 +102,13 @@ struct audit_net {* This struct is RCU protected; you must either hold the RCU lock for reading * or the associated spinlock for writing. */ -static struct auditd_connection { +struct auditd_connection {struct pid *pid;u32 portid;struct net *net;struct rcu_head rcu; -} *auditd_conn =NULL ; +}; +static struct auditd_connection __rcu *auditd_conn;static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (auditd_conn_lock);/* If audit_rate_limit is non-zero, limit the rate of sending audit records Signature · 1 line
2.24.0
Quoted 10 lines · Steven Rostedt
Quoted 3 lines · On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 16:19:15 -0500 Joel Fernandes <[email protected]> wrote:
Good idea to CC the following on RCU patches:
Paul McKenney
Steven RostedtI'm fine with this if it doesn't cause any rcu splats with sparse. Not sure if use cases of RCU requires RCU maintainers Cc'd. Although we can usually keep people from misusing it ;-)
Yes true :) Thanks for taking a look.
- Joel
Quoted 57 lines
-- Steve
Quoted 52 lines
(Any others on the RCU maintainers list).
And, the list: [email protected]Could anyone Ack the patch? Looks safe and straight forward.
Quoted 46 lines · Amol Grover
Add
__rcuannotation to RCU-protected global pointerauditd_conn.
auditd_connis an RCU-protected global pointer,i.e., accessed via RCU methodsrcu_dereference()andrcu_assign_pointer(), hence it must be annotated with__rcufor sparse to report warnings/errors correctly.Fix multiple instances of the sparse error:
error: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces)Reviewed-by Joel Fernandes (Google) <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Amol Grover <[email protected]>---
v3:
- update changelog to be more descriptivev2:
- fix erroneous RCU pointer initializationkernel/audit.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)kernel/audit.c +3
-2@@ -102,12 +102,13 @@ struct audit_net {* This struct is RCU protected; you must either hold the RCU lock for reading * or the associated spinlock for writing. */ -static struct auditd_connection { +struct auditd_connection {struct pid *pid;u32 portid;struct net *net;struct rcu_head rcu; -} *auditd_conn =NULL ; +}; +static struct auditd_connection __rcu *auditd_conn;static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (auditd_conn_lock);/* If audit_rate_limit is non-zero, limit the rate of sending audit records Signature · 1 line
2.24.0
Paul Moore
maintainerQuoted 7 lines · Joel Fernandes
Good idea to CC the following on RCU patches:
Paul McKenney
Steven Rostedt
(Any others on the RCU maintainers list).
And, the list: [email protected]Could anyone Ack the patch? Looks safe and straight forward.
FWIW, this looks reasonable to me, but I don't see this as a critical fix that needs to go in during the merge window. Unless I see any objections, I'll plan on merging this into audit/next once the merge window closes.
Quoted 43 lines · Amol Grover
Quoted 42 lines
Add
__rcuannotation to RCU-protected global pointerauditd_conn.
auditd_connis an RCU-protected global pointer,i.e., accessed via RCU methodsrcu_dereference()andrcu_assign_pointer(), hence it must be annotated with__rcufor sparse to report warnings/errors correctly.Fix multiple instances of the sparse error:
error: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces)Reviewed-by Joel Fernandes (Google) <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Amol Grover <[email protected]>---
v3:
- update changelog to be more descriptivev2:
- fix erroneous RCU pointer initializationkernel/audit.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)kernel/audit.c +3
-2@@ -102,12 +102,13 @@ struct audit_net {* This struct is RCU protected; you must either hold the RCU lock for reading * or the associated spinlock for writing. */ -static struct auditd_connection { +struct auditd_connection {struct pid *pid;u32 portid;struct net *net;struct rcu_head rcu; -} *auditd_conn =NULL ; +}; +static struct auditd_connection __rcu *auditd_conn;static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (auditd_conn_lock);
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/audit.c +0
-1/* If audit_rate_limit is non-zero, limit the rate of sending audit records -- 2.24.0
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
Quoted 7 lines · Paul Moore
Quoted 6 lines · Joel Fernandes
Good idea to CC the following on RCU patches:
Paul McKenney
Steven Rostedt
(Any others on the RCU maintainers list).
And, the list: [email protected]
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
Could anyone Ack the patch? Looks safe and straight forward.
FWIW, this looks reasonable to me, but I don't see this as a critical fix that needs to go in during the merge window. Unless I see any objections, I'll plan on merging this into audit/next once the merge window closes.
Sounds good, thanks!
- Joel
Quoted 53 lines
Quoted 43 lines · Amol Grover
Quoted 42 lines
Add
__rcuannotation to RCU-protected global pointerauditd_conn.
auditd_connis an RCU-protected global pointer,i.e., accessed via RCU methodsrcu_dereference()andrcu_assign_pointer(), hence it must be annotated with__rcufor sparse to report warnings/errors correctly.Fix multiple instances of the sparse error:
error: incompatible types in comparison expression (different address spaces)Reviewed-by Joel Fernandes (Google) <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Amol Grover <[email protected]>---
v3:
- update changelog to be more descriptivev2:
- fix erroneous RCU pointer initializationkernel/audit.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)kernel/audit.c +3
-2@@ -102,12 +102,13 @@ struct audit_net {* This struct is RCU protected; you must either hold the RCU lock for reading * or the associated spinlock for writing. */ -static struct auditd_connection { +struct auditd_connection {struct pid *pid;u32 portid;struct net *net;struct rcu_head rcu; -} *auditd_conn =NULL ; +}; +static struct auditd_connection __rcu *auditd_conn;static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (auditd_conn_lock);Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 4 lines
kernel/audit.c +0
-1/* If audit_rate_limit is non-zero, limit the rate of sending audit records -- 2.24.0
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
Paul Moore
maintainerQuoted 8 lines · Joel Fernandes
Quoted 7 lines · Paul Moore
Quoted 6 lines · Joel Fernandes
Good idea to CC the following on RCU patches:
Paul McKenney
Steven Rostedt
(Any others on the RCU maintainers list).
And, the list: [email protected]
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
Could anyone Ack the patch? Looks safe and straight forward.
FWIW, this looks reasonable to me, but I don't see this as a critical fix that needs to go in during the merge window. Unless I see any objections, I'll plan on merging this into audit/next once the merge window closes.
Sounds good, thanks!
FYI, it's in audit/next now. Thanks again.
Signature · 2 lines
paul moore www.paul-moore.com