Commit e8cfc326 authored by Neeraj Upadhyay's avatar Neeraj Upadhyay Committed by Greg Kroah-Hartman

rcu: Do a single rhp->func read in rcu_head_after_call_rcu()

[ Upstream commit b699cce1 ]

The rcu_head_after_call_rcu() function reads the rhp->func pointer twice,
which can result in a false-positive WARN_ON_ONCE() if the callback
were passed to call_rcu() between the two reads.  Although racing
rcu_head_after_call_rcu() with call_rcu() is to be a dubious use case
(the return value is not reliable in that case), intermittent and
irreproducible warnings are also quite dubious.  This commit therefore
uses a single READ_ONCE() to pick up the value of rhp->func once, then
tests that value twice, thus guaranteeing consistent processing within
rcu_head_after_call_rcu()().

Neverthless, racing rcu_head_after_call_rcu() with call_rcu() is still
a dubious use case.
Signed-off-by: default avatarNeeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>
[ paulmck: Add blank line after declaration per checkpatch.pl. ]
Signed-off-by: default avatarPaul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarSasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
parent f618b46f
...@@ -878,9 +878,11 @@ static inline void rcu_head_init(struct rcu_head *rhp) ...@@ -878,9 +878,11 @@ static inline void rcu_head_init(struct rcu_head *rhp)
static inline bool static inline bool
rcu_head_after_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *rhp, rcu_callback_t f) rcu_head_after_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *rhp, rcu_callback_t f)
{ {
if (READ_ONCE(rhp->func) == f) rcu_callback_t func = READ_ONCE(rhp->func);
if (func == f)
return true; return true;
WARN_ON_ONCE(READ_ONCE(rhp->func) != (rcu_callback_t)~0L); WARN_ON_ONCE(func != (rcu_callback_t)~0L);
return false; return false;
} }
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment