mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bitops, kcsan: Partially revert instrumentation for non-atomic bitops
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 09:26:28 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200818162628.GG27891@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNOvS2FbvAk+j8N0uSuUJgbi=L2_zfK_koOKvJCuys7r7Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 10:34:28AM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 at 18:39, Marco Elver <elver@google.com> wrote:
> > Previous to the change to distinguish read-write accesses, when
> > CONFIG_KCSAN_ASSUME_PLAIN_WRITES_ATOMIC=y is set, KCSAN would consider
> > the non-atomic bitops as atomic. We want to partially revert to this
> > behaviour, but with one important distinction: report racing
> > modifications, since lost bits due to non-atomicity are certainly
> > possible.
> >
> > Given the operations here only modify a single bit, assuming
> > non-atomicity of the writer is sufficient may be reasonable for certain
> > usage (and follows the permissible nature of the "assume plain writes
> > atomic" rule). In other words:
> >
> >         1. We want non-atomic read-modify-write races to be reported;
> >            this is accomplished by kcsan_check_read(), where any
> >            concurrent write (atomic or not) will generate a report.
> >
> >         2. We do not want to report races with marked readers, but -do-
> >            want to report races with unmarked readers; this is
> >            accomplished by the instrument_write() ("assume atomic
> >            write" with Kconfig option set).
> >
> > With the above rules, when KCSAN_ASSUME_PLAIN_WRITES_ATOMIC is selected,
> > it is hoped that KCSAN's reporting behaviour is better aligned with
> > current expected permissible usage for non-atomic bitops.
> >
> > Note that, a side-effect of not telling KCSAN that the accesses are
> > read-writes, is that this information is not displayed in the access
> > summary in the report. It is, however, visible in inline-expanded stack
> > traces. For now, it does not make sense to introduce yet another special
> > case to KCSAN's runtime, only to cater to the case here.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
> > Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > As discussed, partially reverting behaviour for non-atomic bitops when
> > KCSAN_ASSUME_PLAIN_WRITES_ATOMIC is selected.
> >
> > I'd like to avoid more special cases in KCSAN's runtime to cater to
> > cases like this, not only because it adds more complexity, but it
> > invites more special cases to be added. If there are other such
> > primitives, we likely have to do it on a case-by-case basis as well, and
> > justify carefully for each such case. But currently, as far as I can
> > tell, the bitops are truly special, simply because we do know each op
> > just touches a single bit.
> > ---
> >  .../bitops/instrumented-non-atomic.h          | 30 +++++++++++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> Paul, if it looks good to you, feel free to pick it up.

Queued, thank you!

							Thanx, Paul

      reply	other threads:[~2020-08-18 16:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-13 16:38 Marco Elver
2020-08-18  8:34 ` Marco Elver
2020-08-18 16:26   ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]

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=20200818162628.GG27891@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72 \
    --to=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®