[PATCH v2 00/35] bitops: add atomic find_bit() operations

[Jan Kara]

On Tue 05-12-23 21:22:59, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 07:51:01PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > This series is a result of discussion [1]. All find_bit() functions imply
> > > exclusive access to the bitmaps. However, KCSAN reports quite a number
> > > of warnings related to find_bit() API. Some of them are not pointing
> > > to real bugs because in many situations people intentionally allow
> > > concurrent bitmap operations.
> > > 
> > > If so, find_bit() can be annotated such that KCSAN will ignore it:
> > > 
> > >         bit = data_race(find_first_bit(bitmap, nbits));
> > 
> > No, this is not a correct thing to do. If concurrent bitmap changes can
> > happen, find_first_bit() as it is currently implemented isn't ever a safe
> > choice because it can call __ffs(0) which is dangerous as you properly note
> > above. I proposed adding READ_ONCE() into find_first_bit() / find_next_bit()
> > implementation to fix this issue but you disliked that. So other option we
> > have is adding find_first_bit() and find_next_bit() variants that take
> > volatile 'addr' and we have to use these in code like xas_find_chunk()
> > which cannot be converted to your new helpers.
> 
> Here is some examples when concurrent operations with plain find_bit()
> are acceptable:
> 
>  - two threads running find_*_bit(): safe wrt ffs(0) and returns correct
>    value, because underlying bitmap is unchanged;
>  - find_next_bit() in parallel with set or clear_bit(), when modifying
>    a bit prior to the start bit to search: safe and correct;
>  - find_first_bit() in parallel with set_bit(): safe, but may return wrong
>    bit number;
>  - find_first_zero_bit() in parallel with clear_bit(): same as above.
> 
> In last 2 cases find_bit() may not return a correct bit number, but
> it may be OK if caller requires any (not exactly first) set or clear
> bit, correspondingly.
> 
> In such cases, KCSAN may be safely silenced.

True - but these are special cases. In particular the case in xas_find_chunk()
is not any of these special cases. It is using find_next_bit() which is can
be racing with clear_bit(). So what are your plans for such usecase?

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack at suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR