| Message ID | 6ed7ae627d8271fb7f20e0a9c6750fbba1ac2635.1605634911.git.pabeni@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [net-next,v2] net: add annotation for sock_{lock,unlock}_fast | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| netdev/cover_letter | success | Link |
| netdev/fixes_present | success | Link |
| netdev/patch_count | success | Link |
| netdev/tree_selection | success | Clearly marked for net-next |
| netdev/subject_prefix | success | Link |
| netdev/source_inline | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
| netdev/verify_signedoff | success | Link |
| netdev/module_param | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
| netdev/build_32bit | success | Errors and warnings before: 4769 this patch: 4758 |
| netdev/kdoc | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
| netdev/verify_fixes | success | Link |
| netdev/checkpatch | success | total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 40 lines checked |
| netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn | success | Errors and warnings before: 5135 this patch: 5124 |
| netdev/header_inline | success | Link |
| netdev/stable | success | Stable not CCed |
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 19:43:49 +0100 Paolo Abeni wrote: > The static checker is fooled by the non-static locking scheme > implemented by the mentioned helpers. > Let's make its life easier adding some unconditional annotation > so that the helpers are now interpreted as a plain spinlock from > sparse. > > v1 -> v2: > - add __releases() annotation to unlock_sock_fast() > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> Applied, thank you!
diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h index 1d29aeae74fd..093b51719c69 100644 --- a/include/net/sock.h +++ b/include/net/sock.h @@ -1595,7 +1595,8 @@ void release_sock(struct sock *sk); SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING) #define bh_unlock_sock(__sk) spin_unlock(&((__sk)->sk_lock.slock)) -bool lock_sock_fast(struct sock *sk); +bool lock_sock_fast(struct sock *sk) __acquires(&sk->sk_lock.slock); + /** * unlock_sock_fast - complement of lock_sock_fast * @sk: socket @@ -1605,11 +1606,14 @@ bool lock_sock_fast(struct sock *sk); * If slow mode is on, we call regular release_sock() */ static inline void unlock_sock_fast(struct sock *sk, bool slow) + __releases(&sk->sk_lock.slock) { - if (slow) + if (slow) { release_sock(sk); - else + __release(&sk->sk_lock.slock); + } else { spin_unlock_bh(&sk->sk_lock.slock); + } } /* Used by processes to "lock" a socket state, so that diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c index 727ea1cc633c..9badbe7bb4e4 100644 --- a/net/core/sock.c +++ b/net/core/sock.c @@ -3078,7 +3078,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(release_sock); * * sk_lock.slock unlocked, owned = 1, BH enabled */ -bool lock_sock_fast(struct sock *sk) +bool lock_sock_fast(struct sock *sk) __acquires(&sk->sk_lock.slock) { might_sleep(); spin_lock_bh(&sk->sk_lock.slock); @@ -3096,6 +3096,7 @@ bool lock_sock_fast(struct sock *sk) * The sk_lock has mutex_lock() semantics here: */ mutex_acquire(&sk->sk_lock.dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_); + __acquire(&sk->sk_lock.slock); local_bh_enable(); return true; }
The static checker is fooled by the non-static locking scheme implemented by the mentioned helpers. Let's make its life easier adding some unconditional annotation so that the helpers are now interpreted as a plain spinlock from sparse. v1 -> v2: - add __releases() annotation to unlock_sock_fast() Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> --- include/net/sock.h | 10 +++++++--- net/core/sock.c | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)