Re: [PATCH v2] driver: gpu: Fixing warning directly dereferencing a rcu pointer

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]<

 



On 11/13/23 19:55, Abhinav Singh wrote:
On 11/14/23 00:19, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
Hi,

thanks for sending a v2.

On 11/13/23 19:42, Abhinav Singh wrote:
This patch fixes a sparse warning with this message
"warning:dereference of noderef expression". In this context it means we
are dereferencing a __rcu tagged pointer directly.

Better use imperative here, e.g. "Fix a sparse warning ...".

Wouldn't ask you to send a v3 for that alone...


We should not be directly dereferencing a rcu pointer, rather we should
be using rcu helper function rcu_dereferece() inside rcu read critical
section to get a normal pointer which can be dereferenced.

...but this doesn't seem accurate anymore as well.

- Danilo


I tested with qemu with this command
qemu-system-x86_64 \
    -m 2G \
    -smp 2 \
    -kernel bzImage \
    -append "console=ttyS0 root=/dev/sda earlyprintk=serial net.ifnames=0" \
    -drive file=bullseye.img,format=raw \
    -net user,host=10.0.2.10,hostfwd=tcp:127.0.0.1:10021-:22 \
    -net nic,model=e1000 \
    -enable-kvm \
    -nographic \
    -pidfile vm.pid \
    2>&1 | tee vm.log
with lockdep enabled.

Signed-off-by: Abhinav Singh <singhabhinav9051571833@xxxxxxxxx>
---
v1 -> v2 : Replaced the rcu_dereference(...) with unrcu_pointer(...) and
also removed the rcu locking and unlocking function call.

  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv04_fence.c | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv04_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv04_fence.c
index 5b71a5a5cd85..cdbc75e3d1f6 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv04_fence.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv04_fence.c
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ struct nv04_fence_priv {
  static int
  nv04_fence_emit(struct nouveau_fence *fence)
  {
-    struct nvif_push *push = fence->channel->chan.push;
+    struct nvif_push *push = unrcu_pointer(fence->channel)->chan.push;
      int ret = PUSH_WAIT(push, 2);
      if (ret == 0) {
          PUSH_NVSQ(push, NV_SW, 0x0150, fence->base.seqno);

Hi maintainers thanks a lot for reviewing this patch.
I think I should fix my mistake by sending in another patch so that the code changes and description matches. So should I send another patch ?

Yes, please send a v3.


Thank You,
Abhinav Singh





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux