From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>,
Milan Broz <mbroz@redhat.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@googlemail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] debug_check_no_locks_freed: fix in_range() checks
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 13:53:43 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071124105343.GA2044@tv-sign.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071121155842.GA864@tv-sign.ru>
Torsten, could you ack/nack this patch?
Torsten Kaiser wrote:
>
> static inline int in_range(const void *start, const void *addr, const void *end)
> {
> return addr >= start && addr <= end;
> }
> This will return true, if addr is in the range of start (including)
> to end (including).
>
> But debug_check_no_locks_freed() seems does:
> const void *mem_to = mem_from + mem_len
> -> mem_to is the last byte of the freed range, that fits in_range
> lock_from = (void *)hlock->instance;
> -> first byte of the lock
> lock_to = (void *)(hlock->instance + 1);
> -> first byte of the next lock, not last byte of the lock that is being checked!
>
> The test is:
> if (!in_range(mem_from, lock_from, mem_to) &&
> !in_range(mem_from, lock_to, mem_to))
> continue;
> So it tests, if the first byte of the lock is in the range that is freed ->OK
> And if the first byte of the *next* lock is in the range that is freed
> -> Not OK.
We can also simplify in_range checks, we need only 2 comparisons, not 4.
If the lock is not in memory range, it should be either at the left of range
or at the right.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
--- 24/kernel/lockdep.c~ 2007-11-09 12:57:31.000000000 +0300
+++ 24/kernel/lockdep.c 2007-11-24 13:32:52.000000000 +0300
@@ -3054,11 +3054,6 @@ void __init lockdep_info(void)
#endif
}
-static inline int in_range(const void *start, const void *addr, const void *end)
-{
- return addr >= start && addr <= end;
-}
-
static void
print_freed_lock_bug(struct task_struct *curr, const void *mem_from,
const void *mem_to, struct held_lock *hlock)
@@ -3080,6 +3075,13 @@ print_freed_lock_bug(struct task_struct
dump_stack();
}
+static inline int not_in_range(const void* mem_from, unsigned long mem_len,
+ const void* lock_from, unsigned long lock_len)
+{
+ return lock_from + lock_len <= mem_from ||
+ mem_from + mem_len <= lock_from;
+}
+
/*
* Called when kernel memory is freed (or unmapped), or if a lock
* is destroyed or reinitialized - this code checks whether there is
@@ -3087,7 +3089,6 @@ print_freed_lock_bug(struct task_struct
*/
void debug_check_no_locks_freed(const void *mem_from, unsigned long mem_len)
{
- const void *mem_to = mem_from + mem_len, *lock_from, *lock_to;
struct task_struct *curr = current;
struct held_lock *hlock;
unsigned long flags;
@@ -3100,14 +3101,11 @@ void debug_check_no_locks_freed(const vo
for (i = 0; i < curr->lockdep_depth; i++) {
hlock = curr->held_locks + i;
- lock_from = (void *)hlock->instance;
- lock_to = (void *)(hlock->instance + 1);
-
- if (!in_range(mem_from, lock_from, mem_to) &&
- !in_range(mem_from, lock_to, mem_to))
+ if (not_in_range(mem_from, mem_len, hlock->instance,
+ sizeof(*hlock->instance)))
continue;
- print_freed_lock_bug(curr, mem_from, mem_to, hlock);
+ print_freed_lock_bug(curr, mem_from, mem_from + mem_len, hlock);
break;
}
local_irq_restore(flags);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-24 10:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20071120234605.GG23667@elte.hu>
2007-11-21 15:58 ` 2.6.24-rc2-mm1: kcryptd vs lockdep Oleg Nesterov
2007-11-21 16:06 ` Johannes Berg
2007-11-24 10:53 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2007-11-24 12:18 ` [PATCH] debug_check_no_locks_freed: fix in_range() checks Torsten Kaiser
2007-11-24 12:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-11-24 12:35 ` Alasdair G Kergon
2007-11-24 12:22 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20071124105343.GA2044@tv-sign.ru \
--to=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=just.for.lkml@googlemail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbroz@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).