From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47F95C43141 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 15:34:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1596220730 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 15:34:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1573918499; bh=4JKeG1UGiGuAI6kdmw4o2vLC7dkENZs/jJmsBEWfHmY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID: From; b=hkLix9bFSrIzqvVQtsvIhsRYh7YSAFnLeqXqJSsMKpgbz0hYwzthb8y1XEw2xcjbI 2TXxzcss0E0b/BFwIa0s425ElZZMAPnJW5x3WQCXP52gYFO0Af+LzL7siEItQ4b58g DBnln6RAXQLQZIh0ob3Zn5haUVvfxuLxa7HstjtU= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727785AbfKPPe4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Nov 2019 10:34:56 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:41042 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727737AbfKPPe4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Nov 2019 10:34:56 -0500 Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-P72.home (50-39-105-78.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net [50.39.105.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C127720700; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 15:34:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1573918494; bh=4JKeG1UGiGuAI6kdmw4o2vLC7dkENZs/jJmsBEWfHmY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=X3NPg89cEppRZ2Ufq25iO1k0ekjtPtTbIbLTVTHxQEgDEvkP6XY3DfvqN9EuLqcYL KV45r1lccVl2DxriNAereFYnXilzKUOtwW1UxLXr2OiBha8f6K6lX+6lbrXXj0a8D1 CDQ0FwllS5o4jPei//ti4OGZ/sYxrI7wBQgCie1c= Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-P72.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 940BA35227AD; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 07:34:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 07:34:54 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Marco Elver Cc: LKMM Maintainers -- Akira Yokosawa , Alan Stern , Alexander Potapenko , Andrea Parri , Andrey Konovalov , Andy Lutomirski , Ard Biesheuvel , Arnd Bergmann , Boqun Feng , Borislav Petkov , Daniel Axtens , Daniel Lustig , Dave Hansen , David Howells , Dmitry Vyukov , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Jade Alglave , Joel Fernandes , Jonathan Corbet , Josh Poimboeuf , Luc Maranget , Mark Rutland , Nicholas Piggin , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Will Deacon , Eric Dumazet , kasan-dev , linux-arch , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" , linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kbuild mailing list , LKML , Linux Memory Management List , the arch/x86 maintainers Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] Add Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer (KCSAN) Message-ID: <20191116153454.GC2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org References: <20191114180303.66955-1-elver@google.com> <20191114195046.GP2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20191114213303.GA237245@google.com> <20191114221559.GS2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20191115164159.GU2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20191115204321.GX2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 09:20:54AM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 21:43, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 06:14:46PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > > > On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 17:42, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 01:02:08PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 at 23:16, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 10:33:03PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 14 Nov 2019, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 07:02:53PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > > > > > > > > > This is the patch-series for the Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer (KCSAN). > > > > > > > > > KCSAN is a sampling watchpoint-based *data race detector*. More details > > > > > > > > > are included in **Documentation/dev-tools/kcsan.rst**. This patch-series > > > > > > > > > only enables KCSAN for x86, but we expect adding support for other > > > > > > > > > architectures is relatively straightforward (we are aware of > > > > > > > > > experimental ARM64 and POWER support). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To gather early feedback, we announced KCSAN back in September, and have > > > > > > > > > integrated the feedback where possible: > > > > > > > > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CANpmjNPJ_bHjfLZCAPV23AXFfiPiyXXqqu72n6TgWzb2Gnu1eA@mail.gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The current list of known upstream fixes for data races found by KCSAN > > > > > > > > > can be found here: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/google/ktsan/wiki/KCSAN#upstream-fixes-of-data-races-found-by-kcsan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We want to point out and acknowledge the work surrounding the LKMM, > > > > > > > > > including several articles that motivate why data races are dangerous > > > > > > > > > [1, 2], justifying a data race detector such as KCSAN. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/793253/ > > > > > > > > > [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/799218/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I queued this and ran a quick rcutorture on it, which completed > > > > > > > > successfully with quite a few reports. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Great. Many thanks for queuing this in -rcu. And regarding merge window > > > > > > > you mentioned, we're fine with your assumption to targeting the next > > > > > > > (v5.6) merge window. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've just had a look at linux-next to check what a future rebase > > > > > > > requires: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - There is a change in lib/Kconfig.debug and moving KCSAN to the > > > > > > > "Generic Kernel Debugging Instruments" section seems appropriate. > > > > > > > - bitops-instrumented.h was removed and split into 3 files, and needs > > > > > > > re-inserting the instrumentation into the right places. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise there are no issues. Let me know what you recommend. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds good! > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be rebasing onto v5.5-rc1 shortly after it comes out. My usual > > > > > > approach is to fix any conflicts during that rebasing operation. > > > > > > Does that make sense, or would you prefer to send me a rebased stack at > > > > > > that point? Either way is fine for me. > > > > > > > > > > That's fine with me, thanks! To avoid too much additional churn on > > > > > your end, I just replied to the bitops patch with a version that will > > > > > apply with the change to bitops-instrumented infrastructure. > > > > > > > > My first thought was to replace 8/10 of the previous version of your > > > > patch in -rcu (047ca266cfab "asm-generic, kcsan: Add KCSAN instrumentation > > > > for bitops"), but this does not apply. So I am guessing that I instead > > > > do this substitution when a rebase onto -rc1.. > > > > > > > > Except... > > > > > > > > > Also considering the merge window, we had a discussion and there are > > > > > some arguments for targeting the v5.5 merge window: > > > > > - we'd unblock ARM and POWER ports; > > > > > - we'd unblock people wanting to use the data_race macro; > > > > > - we'd unblock syzbot just tracking upstream; > > > > > Unless there are strong reasons to not target v5.5, I leave it to you > > > > > if you think it's appropriate. > > > > > > > > My normal process is to send the pull request shortly after -rc5 comes > > > > out, but you do call out some benefits of getting it in sooner, so... > > > > > > > > What I will do is to rebase your series onto (say) -rc7, test it, and > > > > see about an RFC pull request. > > > > > > > > One possible complication is the new 8/10 patch. But maybe it will > > > > apply against -rc7? > > > > > > > > Another possible complication is this: > > > > > > > > scripts/kconfig/conf --syncconfig Kconfig > > > > * > > > > * Restart config... > > > > * > > > > * > > > > * KCSAN: watchpoint-based dynamic data race detector > > > > * > > > > KCSAN: watchpoint-based dynamic data race detector (KCSAN) [N/y/?] (NEW) > > > > > > > > Might be OK in this case because it is quite obvious what it is doing. > > > > (Avoiding pain from this is the reason that CONFIG_RCU_EXPERT exists.) > > > > > > > > But I will just mention this in the pull request. > > > > > > > > If there is a -rc8, there is of course a higher probability of making it > > > > into the next merge window. > > > > > > > > Fair enough? > > > > > > Totally fine with that, sounds like a good plan, thanks! > > > > > > If it helps, in theory we can also drop and delay the bitops > > > instrumentation patch until the new bitops instrumentation > > > infrastructure is in 5.5-rc1. There won't be any false positives if > > > this is missing, we might just miss a few data races until we have it. > > > > That sounds advisable for an attempt to hit this coming merge window. > > > > So just to make sure I understand, I drop 8/10 and keep the rest during > > a rebase to 5.4-rc7, correct? > > Yes, that's right. Very good, I just now pushed a "kcsan" branch on -rcu, and am running rcutorture, first without KCSAN enabled and then with it turned on. If all that works out, I set my -next branch to that point and see what -next testing and kbuild test robot think about it. If all goes well, an RFC pull request. Look OK? Thanx, Paul From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] Add Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer (KCSAN) Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 07:34:54 -0800 Message-ID: <20191116153454.GC2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> References: <20191114180303.66955-1-elver@google.com> <20191114195046.GP2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20191114213303.GA237245@google.com> <20191114221559.GS2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20191115164159.GU2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20191115204321.GX2865@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Marco Elver Cc: LKMM Maintainers -- Akira Yokosawa , Alan Stern , Alexander Potapenko , Andrea Parri , Andrey Konovalov , Andy Lutomirski , Ard Biesheuvel , Arnd Bergmann , Boqun Feng , Borislav Petkov , Daniel Axtens , Daniel Lustig , Dave Hansen , David Howells , Dmitry Vyukov , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Jade Alglave , Joel Fernandes , Jonathan Corbet List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 09:20:54AM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 21:43, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 06:14:46PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > > > On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 at 17:42, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 01:02:08PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 at 23:16, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 10:33:03PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 14 Nov 2019, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 07:02:53PM +0100, Marco Elver wrote: > > > > > > > > > This is the patch-series for the Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer (KCSAN). > > > > > > > > > KCSAN is a sampling watchpoint-based *data race detector*. More details > > > > > > > > > are included in **Documentation/dev-tools/kcsan.rst**. This patch-series > > > > > > > > > only enables KCSAN for x86, but we expect adding support for other > > > > > > > > > architectures is relatively straightforward (we are aware of > > > > > > > > > experimental ARM64 and POWER support). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To gather early feedback, we announced KCSAN back in September, and have > > > > > > > > > integrated the feedback where possible: > > > > > > > > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CANpmjNPJ_bHjfLZCAPV23AXFfiPiyXXqqu72n6TgWzb2Gnu1eA@mail.gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The current list of known upstream fixes for data races found by KCSAN > > > > > > > > > can be found here: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/google/ktsan/wiki/KCSAN#upstream-fixes-of-data-races-found-by-kcsan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We want to point out and acknowledge the work surrounding the LKMM, > > > > > > > > > including several articles that motivate why data races are dangerous > > > > > > > > > [1, 2], justifying a data race detector such as KCSAN. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/793253/ > > > > > > > > > [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/799218/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I queued this and ran a quick rcutorture on it, which completed > > > > > > > > successfully with quite a few reports. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Great. Many thanks for queuing this in -rcu. And regarding merge window > > > > > > > you mentioned, we're fine with your assumption to targeting the next > > > > > > > (v5.6) merge window. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've just had a look at linux-next to check what a future rebase > > > > > > > requires: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - There is a change in lib/Kconfig.debug and moving KCSAN to the > > > > > > > "Generic Kernel Debugging Instruments" section seems appropriate. > > > > > > > - bitops-instrumented.h was removed and split into 3 files, and needs > > > > > > > re-inserting the instrumentation into the right places. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise there are no issues. Let me know what you recommend. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds good! > > > > > > > > > > > > I will be rebasing onto v5.5-rc1 shortly after it comes out. My usual > > > > > > approach is to fix any conflicts during that rebasing operation. > > > > > > Does that make sense, or would you prefer to send me a rebased stack at > > > > > > that point? Either way is fine for me. > > > > > > > > > > That's fine with me, thanks! To avoid too much additional churn on > > > > > your end, I just replied to the bitops patch with a version that will > > > > > apply with the change to bitops-instrumented infrastructure. > > > > > > > > My first thought was to replace 8/10 of the previous version of your > > > > patch in -rcu (047ca266cfab "asm-generic, kcsan: Add KCSAN instrumentation > > > > for bitops"), but this does not apply. So I am guessing that I instead > > > > do this substitution when a rebase onto -rc1.. > > > > > > > > Except... > > > > > > > > > Also considering the merge window, we had a discussion and there are > > > > > some arguments for targeting the v5.5 merge window: > > > > > - we'd unblock ARM and POWER ports; > > > > > - we'd unblock people wanting to use the data_race macro; > > > > > - we'd unblock syzbot just tracking upstream; > > > > > Unless there are strong reasons to not target v5.5, I leave it to you > > > > > if you think it's appropriate. > > > > > > > > My normal process is to send the pull request shortly after -rc5 comes > > > > out, but you do call out some benefits of getting it in sooner, so... > > > > > > > > What I will do is to rebase your series onto (say) -rc7, test it, and > > > > see about an RFC pull request. > > > > > > > > One possible complication is the new 8/10 patch. But maybe it will > > > > apply against -rc7? > > > > > > > > Another possible complication is this: > > > > > > > > scripts/kconfig/conf --syncconfig Kconfig > > > > * > > > > * Restart config... > > > > * > > > > * > > > > * KCSAN: watchpoint-based dynamic data race detector > > > > * > > > > KCSAN: watchpoint-based dynamic data race detector (KCSAN) [N/y/?] (NEW) > > > > > > > > Might be OK in this case because it is quite obvious what it is doing. > > > > (Avoiding pain from this is the reason that CONFIG_RCU_EXPERT exists.) > > > > > > > > But I will just mention this in the pull request. > > > > > > > > If there is a -rc8, there is of course a higher probability of making it > > > > into the next merge window. > > > > > > > > Fair enough? > > > > > > Totally fine with that, sounds like a good plan, thanks! > > > > > > If it helps, in theory we can also drop and delay the bitops > > > instrumentation patch until the new bitops instrumentation > > > infrastructure is in 5.5-rc1. There won't be any false positives if > > > this is missing, we might just miss a few data races until we have it. > > > > That sounds advisable for an attempt to hit this coming merge window. > > > > So just to make sure I understand, I drop 8/10 and keep the rest during > > a rebase to 5.4-rc7, correct? > > Yes, that's right. Very good, I just now pushed a "kcsan" branch on -rcu, and am running rcutorture, first without KCSAN enabled and then with it turned on. If all that works out, I set my -next branch to that point and see what -next testing and kbuild test robot think about it. If all goes well, an RFC pull request. Look OK? Thanx, Paul