From 8229706e03e4147f3e22d1de0d30630cde6d18a9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matthew Wilcox Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 16:55:19 -0400 Subject: XArray: Fix xa_for_each with a single element at 0 The following sequence of calls would result in an infinite loop in xa_find_after(): xa_store(xa, 0, x, GFP_KERNEL); index = 0; xa_for_each(xa, entry, index, ULONG_MAX, XA_PRESENT) { } xa_find_after() was confusing the situation where we found no entry in the tree with finding a multiorder entry, so it would look for the successor entry forever. Just check for this case explicitly. Includes a few new checks in the test suite to be sure this doesn't reappear. Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox --- lib/test_xarray.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'lib/test_xarray.c') diff --git a/lib/test_xarray.c b/lib/test_xarray.c index aa47754150ce..126127658b49 100644 --- a/lib/test_xarray.c +++ b/lib/test_xarray.c @@ -702,7 +702,7 @@ static noinline void check_multi_find_2(struct xarray *xa) } } -static noinline void check_find(struct xarray *xa) +static noinline void check_find_1(struct xarray *xa) { unsigned long i, j, k; @@ -748,6 +748,34 @@ static noinline void check_find(struct xarray *xa) XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_get_mark(xa, i, XA_MARK_0)); } XA_BUG_ON(xa, !xa_empty(xa)); +} + +static noinline void check_find_2(struct xarray *xa) +{ + void *entry; + unsigned long i, j, index = 0; + + xa_for_each(xa, entry, index, ULONG_MAX, XA_PRESENT) { + XA_BUG_ON(xa, true); + } + + for (i = 0; i < 1024; i++) { + xa_store_index(xa, index, GFP_KERNEL); + j = 0; + index = 0; + xa_for_each(xa, entry, index, ULONG_MAX, XA_PRESENT) { + XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_mk_value(index) != entry); + XA_BUG_ON(xa, index != j++); + } + } + + xa_destroy(xa); +} + +static noinline void check_find(struct xarray *xa) +{ + check_find_1(xa); + check_find_2(xa); check_multi_find(xa); check_multi_find_2(xa); } -- cgit From 4c0608f4a0e76dfb82d3accd20081f4bf47ed143 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matthew Wilcox Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 09:45:55 -0400 Subject: XArray: Regularise xa_reserve The xa_reserve() function was a little unusual in that it attempted to be callable for all kinds of locking scenarios. Make it look like the other APIs with __xa_reserve, xa_reserve_bh and xa_reserve_irq variants. Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox --- lib/test_xarray.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) (limited to 'lib/test_xarray.c') diff --git a/lib/test_xarray.c b/lib/test_xarray.c index 126127658b49..e5294b20b52f 100644 --- a/lib/test_xarray.c +++ b/lib/test_xarray.c @@ -373,6 +373,12 @@ static noinline void check_reserve(struct xarray *xa) xa_erase_index(xa, 12345678); XA_BUG_ON(xa, !xa_empty(xa)); + /* And so does xa_insert */ + xa_reserve(xa, 12345678, GFP_KERNEL); + XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_insert(xa, 12345678, xa_mk_value(12345678), 0) != 0); + xa_erase_index(xa, 12345678); + XA_BUG_ON(xa, !xa_empty(xa)); + /* Can iterate through a reserved entry */ xa_store_index(xa, 5, GFP_KERNEL); xa_reserve(xa, 6, GFP_KERNEL); -- cgit From 5404a7f1c21cfda061712bedf2d06cc0f6c755e9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matthew Wilcox Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 09:34:04 -0500 Subject: XArray tests: Correct some 64-bit assumptions The test-suite caught these two mistakes when compiled for 32-bit. I had only been running the test-suite in 64-bit mode. Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox --- lib/test_xarray.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'lib/test_xarray.c') diff --git a/lib/test_xarray.c b/lib/test_xarray.c index e5294b20b52f..5f9c14e975a4 100644 --- a/lib/test_xarray.c +++ b/lib/test_xarray.c @@ -504,7 +504,7 @@ static noinline void check_multi_store(struct xarray *xa) rcu_read_unlock(); /* We can erase multiple values with a single store */ - xa_store_order(xa, 0, 63, NULL, GFP_KERNEL); + xa_store_order(xa, 0, BITS_PER_LONG - 1, NULL, GFP_KERNEL); XA_BUG_ON(xa, !xa_empty(xa)); /* Even when the first slot is empty but the others aren't */ @@ -1101,7 +1101,7 @@ static noinline void check_store_range(struct xarray *xa) __check_store_range(xa, 4095 + i, 4095 + j); __check_store_range(xa, 4096 + i, 4096 + j); __check_store_range(xa, 123456 + i, 123456 + j); - __check_store_range(xa, UINT_MAX + i, UINT_MAX + j); + __check_store_range(xa, (1 << 24) + i, (1 << 24) + j); } } } -- cgit From fffc9a260e38acec3187515738122a3ecb24ac90 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Matthew Wilcox Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 09:36:29 -0500 Subject: XArray tests: Add missing locking Lockdep caught me being sloppy in the test suite and failing to lock the XArray appropriately. Reported-by: kernel test robot Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox --- lib/test_xarray.c | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) (limited to 'lib/test_xarray.c') diff --git a/lib/test_xarray.c b/lib/test_xarray.c index 5f9c14e975a4..0598e86af8fc 100644 --- a/lib/test_xarray.c +++ b/lib/test_xarray.c @@ -208,15 +208,19 @@ static noinline void check_xa_mark_1(struct xarray *xa, unsigned long index) XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_get_mark(xa, i, XA_MARK_2)); /* We should see two elements in the array */ + rcu_read_lock(); xas_for_each(&xas, entry, ULONG_MAX) seen++; + rcu_read_unlock(); XA_BUG_ON(xa, seen != 2); /* One of which is marked */ xas_set(&xas, 0); seen = 0; + rcu_read_lock(); xas_for_each_marked(&xas, entry, ULONG_MAX, XA_MARK_0) seen++; + rcu_read_unlock(); XA_BUG_ON(xa, seen != 1); } XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_get_mark(xa, next, XA_MARK_0)); @@ -442,7 +446,9 @@ static noinline void check_multi_store_1(struct xarray *xa, unsigned long index, XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_load(xa, max) != NULL); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_load(xa, min - 1) != NULL); + xas_lock(&xas); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xas_store(&xas, xa_mk_value(min)) != xa_mk_value(index)); + xas_unlock(&xas); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_load(xa, min) != xa_mk_value(min)); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_load(xa, max - 1) != xa_mk_value(min)); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xa_load(xa, max) != NULL); @@ -458,9 +464,11 @@ static noinline void check_multi_store_2(struct xarray *xa, unsigned long index, XA_STATE(xas, xa, index); xa_store_order(xa, index, order, xa_mk_value(0), GFP_KERNEL); + xas_lock(&xas); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xas_store(&xas, xa_mk_value(1)) != xa_mk_value(0)); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xas.xa_index != index); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xas_store(&xas, NULL) != xa_mk_value(1)); + xas_unlock(&xas); XA_BUG_ON(xa, !xa_empty(xa)); } #endif @@ -1180,10 +1188,12 @@ static noinline void check_account(struct xarray *xa) XA_STATE(xas, xa, 1 << order); xa_store_order(xa, 0, order, xa, GFP_KERNEL); + rcu_read_lock(); xas_load(&xas); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xas.xa_node->count == 0); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xas.xa_node->count > (1 << order)); XA_BUG_ON(xa, xas.xa_node->nr_values != 0); + rcu_read_unlock(); xa_store_order(xa, 1 << order, order, xa_mk_value(1 << order), GFP_KERNEL); -- cgit