ipc/sem, ipc/msg, ipc/mqueue.c kcsan questions
From: Manfred Spraul
Date: Wed May 12 2021 - 16:35:03 EST
Hi,
I got a report from kcsan for sem_lock()/sem_unlock(), but I'm fairly
certain that this is a false positive:
[ 184.344960] BUG: KCSAN: data-race in sem_lock / sem_unlock.part.0
[ 184.360437]
[ 184.375443] write to 0xffff8881022fd6c0 of 4 bytes by task 1128 on
cpu 0:
[ 184.391192] sem_unlock.part.0+0xfa/0x118
0000000000001371 <sem_unlock.part.0>:
static inline void sem_unlock(struct sem_array *sma, int locknum)
1464: eb 0f jmp 1475
<sem_unlock.part.0+0x104>
sma->use_global_lock--;
1466: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 146b
<sem_unlock.part.0+0xfa>
1467: R_X86_64_PLT32 __tsan_write4-0x4
146b: 41 ff cc dec %r12d
[ 184.406693] do_semtimedop+0x690/0xab3
[ 184.422032] __x64_sys_semop+0x3e/0x43
[ 184.437180] do_syscall_64+0x9e/0xb5
[ 184.452125] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 184.467269]
[ 184.482215] read to 0xffff8881022fd6c0 of 4 bytes by task 1129 on
cpu 2:
[ 184.497750] sem_lock+0x59/0xe0
0000000000001bbc <sem_lock>:
if (!sma->use_global_lock) {
1c0a: 4c 89 ef mov %r13,%rdi
idx = array_index_nospec(sops->sem_num, sma->sem_nsems);
1c0d: 0f b7 db movzwl %bx,%ebx
if (!sma->use_global_lock) {
1c10: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 1c15 <sem_lock+0x59>
1c11: R_X86_64_PLT32 __tsan_read4-0x4
[ 184.513121] do_semtimedop+0x4f6/0xab3
[ 184.528427] __x64_sys_semop+0x3e/0x43
[ 184.543540] do_syscall_64+0x9e/0xb5
[ 184.558473] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
sma->use_global_lock is evaluated in sem_lock() twice:
/*
* Initial check for use_global_lock. Just an optimization,
* no locking, no memory barrier.
*/
if (!sma->use_global_lock) {
Both sides of the if-clause handle possible data races.
Is
if (!data_race(sma->use_global_lock)) {
the correct thing to suppress the warning?
/*
* It appears that no complex operation is around.
* Acquire the per-semaphore lock.
*/
spin_lock(&sem->lock);
/* see SEM_BARRIER_1 for purpose/pairing */
if (!smp_load_acquire(&sma->use_global_lock)) {
Here I would need advise: The code only checks for zero / non-zero.
This pairs with complexmode_tryleave():
if (sma->use_global_lock == 1) {
/* See SEM_BARRIER_1 for purpose/pairing */
smp_store_release(&sma->use_global_lock, 0);
} else {
sma->use_global_lock--;
}
If use_global_lock is reduced from e.g. 6 to 5, it is undefined if a
concurrent reader sees 6 or 5. But it doesn't matter, as both values are
non-zero.
The change to 0 is protected.
What is the right way to prevent false positives from kcsan?
As 2nd question:
net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.c, nf_conntrack_all_lock():
Is a data_race() needed around "nf_conntrack_locks_all = true;"?
--
Manfred