From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f68.google.com (mail-wm1-f68.google.com [209.85.128.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6F683C2D for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2026 18:00:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.68 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771264846; cv=none; b=IVkm36Epy2OxX+5GyaBM/X0IV1ZJ7IQwnbIW9YWrfnt2tKFoTyUmJBl3u0cdW+Y40XV2ow1qS0AL4u2x9kVxoa5qWdA6TZauyXDhlsPGMGIfTvumZN2su/7d0zLrDkDzWAvq4egXgEnZNnTISKL8GL2uBhkby1etwkGrjv+VEgA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771264846; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qBNPuZc2vkYNiY2EW78MeppBVWhwwBSAOSsJYIiH0a8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=kzjYFsnN+YUTXZ4wS5vIAtg0kcD93FFLuJSrPOqQKg81VLLTQ76BgnTil14K19/Zjqacc+NmViDMa48mmCSp+sA9aCZyZStm3watgk50LLsrodbLHO0j6n7QlfH5jHV76Nqel+6VaQU+OJFiDpkFSZqdHXqf8JaKOaX3HNk2gKE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=LXySt/Db; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.68 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="LXySt/Db" Received: by mail-wm1-f68.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4836f363d0dso29456195e9.3 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2026 10:00:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1771264843; x=1771869643; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=DlnrkNiHMMWqhc/Lf+03YWMo+lQDLVH+FdrzL4wse3w=; b=LXySt/DbVqcyq4z+F/bDRL0Y6//z+yzgNoWqElAvRB9RkPDOP3OZBLKs6Afo1u+xVN PImHwQS9D52sCXretXsfYpCFhYnoaNui+h6gMEmD1bHpDfdfKyUMahrUqig6JeCMFa7U njf8rd6k60h4INOU9SSRt6QxAx5SJ2jeM30xsnv9P2zBwL3bHoF4Dc6QOZdZb4vC46U2 0aWzvMBnqps0uCevV4LItxex0e0cEm8ko9hp8bHHkNyx4YlKdBrSBKPh7h5mxLJx0mIB mbufGxHOpsu6AMlEuAiVy4br6eR6ELkpMXJZCYc4d5DACqCRHPieKgL5pwuWQdoL5E9v WXMQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1771264843; x=1771869643; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DlnrkNiHMMWqhc/Lf+03YWMo+lQDLVH+FdrzL4wse3w=; b=jf14t+hC/v+lcPWwCBWzR7323sEwNx9xhXeN497LJTT1GHbyVCRjGuG6lpME2chtrW 4FeUcWzjNgopqEgSd4AgT9isTWyNSGH/bQjxujh29kkBc4Hu/kz/BO2iJsIEYxcvwOF1 Y8PdgpegrCVvQF0+jFFu0gcHf1g8Z1H1ad4HVDbovmtDz/utQ5C7Osv+8rq43h/lJxmG OwKQIDWBvJZltb6fjAOgrx1+AeuUO9Yml6FbmEZZ+AfNjJwhMzg3tk0tvtEgyaH186aQ qfsXmeaQWvEHvT8pkug1mD6OBy6Erbhyib1BGY/FSdREdbRrTYIKXFqSI5iVQqfCZzzY aClw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUGJdpavqh9UkXwZsYmhgoM855NrNmD2tsjssdkjoxkV4Ng3MGgraLk0CyRGknRimvEaE6jlGnjNwWT5es=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyGyD1aEI3zAxRXs5bT0MkgvtApY6PUocg0RPzZD1LrjD1Xkg6M E9kc6dZ/Ta96Sddj7IsXSedwagG78eOqKu6UjJrw/Z+lhpF9gvSAhMlbJxqen5d5 X-Gm-Gg: AZuq6aLjQw84luaFzZltBQUcR3kgMYL5WsVDpl4K9e+fYbgKIKxDvZBtc/EojpaQldL s9h5QQJOWWye5qlY2yTODHOM9VyB6yitIkdF5s+8PN82X4ESj8lQU9VtOiA4X0aLlNMul1os+NK zsdFcbcv6WEWewXGSbLVS7zKGzDwvpdvMDuNDb/osEqK5DAa9f83fxFBy12mUT8jWsu3mzNhLWb poFSUUgoBv8dGJXba+VQqdhN+kFQlP3DayDxPK3Ly68uWaCjxcs4Qq+0eefnWsW3xXGKMcAtt1i 5jphyaQsCVJlH+OZWWg5n8JCBWv/9HJ6aPM2PIwRQCaIfHXlyetuOw7ms+hRDBlDjPu+6QSk0CI AZD6VaLZQM0VZKc9nlWYMRc7g37R1XlE3XJVcDrudmDFo4qc/wTBwZ8K7g6PTYJSeBtXSWBmeE7 4U+Zv4SWqzUWcel55DYCrRqRq5z7Lt+M4+acrNsTMy77XvZ9g5ZKCoJa8qnMuyd5wB X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4443:b0:47e:e952:86c9 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-48379b318bamr123202395e9.0.1771264842769; Mon, 16 Feb 2026 10:00:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from pumpkin (82-69-66-36.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.69.66.36]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-4835d994670sm351895235e9.4.2026.02.16.10.00.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 16 Feb 2026 10:00:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2026 18:00:40 +0000 From: David Laight To: Marco Elver Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Will Deacon , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Boqun Feng , Waiman Long , Bart Van Assche , llvm@lists.linux.dev, Al Viro , Catalin Marinas , Nathan Chancellor , Arnd Bergmann , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel test robot , Boqun Feng Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64, compiler-context-analysis: Permit alias analysis through __READ_ONCE() with CONFIG_LTO=y Message-ID: <20260216180040.6a93807a@pumpkin> In-Reply-To: <20260216142436.2207937-4-elver@google.com> References: <20260216142436.2207937-2-elver@google.com> <20260216142436.2207937-4-elver@google.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.38; arm-unknown-linux-gnueabihf) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 15:16:23 +0100 Marco Elver wrote: > When enabling Clang's Context Analysis (aka. Thread Safety Analysis) on > kernel/futex/core.o (see Peter's changes at [1]), in arm64 LTO builds we > could see: > > | kernel/futex/core.c:982:1: warning: spinlock 'atomic ? __u.__val : q->lock_ptr' is still held at the end of function [-Wthread-safety-analysis] > | 982 | } > | | ^ > | kernel/futex/core.c:976:2: note: spinlock acquired here > | 976 | spin_lock(lock_ptr); > | | ^ > | kernel/futex/core.c:982:1: warning: expecting spinlock 'q->lock_ptr' to be held at the end of function [-Wthread-safety-analysis] > | 982 | } > | | ^ > | kernel/futex/core.c:966:6: note: spinlock acquired here > | 966 | void futex_q_lockptr_lock(struct futex_q *q) > | | ^ > | 2 warnings generated. > > Where we have: > > extern void futex_q_lockptr_lock(struct futex_q *q) __acquires(q->lock_ptr); > .. > void futex_q_lockptr_lock(struct futex_q *q) > { > spinlock_t *lock_ptr; > > /* > * See futex_unqueue() why lock_ptr can change. > */ > guard(rcu)(); > retry: > >> lock_ptr = READ_ONCE(q->lock_ptr); Did you try adding OPTIMZER_HIDE_VAR(lock_ptr) here? That might force the TSA logic to use 'where lock_ptr points to' instead of trying to allow an unlock(q->lock_ptr) (or similar) which is clearly entirely broken. Testing a compile with the unlock() missing ought to generate the warning - if not you've just confused the code enough the it stops caring. David > spin_lock(lock_ptr); > ... > } > > At the time of the above report (prior to removal of the 'atomic' flag), > Clang Thread Safety Analysis's alias analysis resolved 'lock_ptr' to > 'atomic ? __u.__val : q->lock_ptr' (now just '__u.__val'), and used > this as the identity of the context lock given it cannot "see through" > the inline assembly; however, we want 'q->lock_ptr' as the canonical > context lock. > > While for code generation the compiler simplified to '__u.__val' for > pointers (8 byte case -> 'atomic' was set), TSA's analysis (a) happens > much earlier on the AST, and (b) would be the wrong deduction. > > Now that we've gotten rid of the 'atomic' ternary comparison, we can > return '__u.__val' through a pointer that we initialize with '&x', but > then update via a pointer-to-pointer. When READ_ONCE()'ing a context > lock pointer, TSA's alias analysis does not invalidate the initial alias > when updated through the pointer-to-pointer, and we make it effectively > "see through" the __READ_ONCE(). > > Code generation is unchanged. > > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20260121110704.221498346@infradead.org [1] > Reported-by: kernel test robot > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601221040.TeM0ihff-lkp@intel.com/ > Cc: Peter Zijlstra > Tested-by: Boqun Feng > Reviewed-by: David Laight > Signed-off-by: Marco Elver > --- > v3: > * Use 'typeof(*__ret)'. > * Commit message. > > v2: > * Rebase. > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/rwonce.h | 10 +++++++--- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/rwonce.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rwonce.h > index 9fd24cef3376..0f3a01d30f66 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/rwonce.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/rwonce.h > @@ -42,8 +42,12 @@ > */ > #define __READ_ONCE(x) \ > ({ \ > - typeof(&(x)) __x = &(x); \ > - union { __rwonce_typeof_unqual(*__x) __val; char __c[1]; } __u; \ > + auto __x = &(x); \ > + auto __ret = (__rwonce_typeof_unqual(*__x) *)__x; \ > + /* Hides alias reassignment from Clang's -Wthread-safety. */ \ > + auto __retp = &__ret; \ > + union { typeof(*__ret) __val; char __c[1]; } __u; \ > + *__retp = &__u.__val; \ > switch (sizeof(x)) { \ > case 1: \ > asm volatile(__LOAD_RCPC(b, %w0, %1) \ > @@ -68,7 +72,7 @@ > default: \ > __u.__val = *(volatile typeof(*__x) *)__x; \ > } \ > - __u.__val; \ > + *__ret; \ > }) > > #endif /* !BUILD_VDSO */