On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 04:43:32PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 3:13 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 05, 2023 at 09:56:19PM +0100, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> > > Cast _oldp to the type of _ptr to avoid incompatible-pointer-types warning.
> >
> > Can you give an example of where we are passing an incompatible pointer?
>
> An example is patch 10/10 from the series, which will fail without
> this fix when fallback code is used. We have:
>
> - } while (local_cmpxchg(&rb->head, offset, head) != offset);
> + } while (!local_try_cmpxchg(&rb->head, &offset, head));
>
> where rb->head is defined as:
>
> typedef struct {
> atomic_long_t a;
> } local_t;
>
> while offset is defined as 'unsigned long'.
Ok, but that's because we're doing the wrong thing to start with.
Since local_t is defined in terms of atomic_long_t, we should define the
generic local_try_cmpxchg() in terms of atomic_long_try_cmpxchg(). We'll still
have a mismatch between 'long *' and 'unsigned long *', but then we can fix
that in the callsite:
while (!local_try_cmpxchg(&rb->head, &(long *)offset, head))
... which then won't silently mask issues elsewhere, and will be consistent
with all the other atomic APIs.
Thanks,
Mark.
>
> The assignment in existing try_cmpxchg template:
>
> typeof(*(_ptr)) *___op = (_oldp)
>
> will trigger an initialization from an incompatible pointer type error.
>
> Please note that x86 avoids this issue by a cast in its
> target-dependent definition:
>
> #define __raw_try_cmpxchg(_ptr, _pold, _new, size, lock) \
> ({ \
> bool success; \
> __typeof__(_ptr) _old = (__typeof__(_ptr))(_pold); \
> __typeof__(*(_ptr)) __old = *_old; \
> __typeof__(*(_ptr)) __new = (_new); \
>
> so, the warning/error will trigger only in the fallback code.
>
> > That sounds indicative of a bug in the caller, but maybe I'm missing some
> > reason this is necessary due to some indirection.
> >
> > > Fixes: 29f006fdefe6 ("asm-generic/atomic: Add try_cmpxchg() fallbacks")
> >
> > I'm not sure that this needs a fixes tag. Does anything go wrong today, or only
> > later in this series?
>
> The patch at [1] triggered a build error in posix_acl.c/__get.acl due
> to the same problem. The compilation for x86 target was OK, because
> x86 defines target-specific arch_try_cmpxchg, but the compilation
> broke for targets that revert to generic support. Please note that
> this specific problem was recently fixed in a different way [2], but
> the issue with the fallback remains.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220714173819.13312-1-ubizjak@xxxxxxxxx/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221201160103.76012-1-ubizjak@xxxxxxxxx/
>
> Uros.
