Add RCU check for find_task_by_vpid().

find_task_by_vpid() says "Must be called under rcu_read_lock().". But due to
commit 3120438 "rcu: Disable lockdep checking in RCU list-traversal primitives",
we are currently unable to catch "find_task_by_vpid() with tasklist_lock held
but RCU lock not held" errors due to the RCU-lockdep checks being
suppressed in the RCU variants of the struct list_head traversals.
This commit therefore places an explicit check for being in an RCU
read-side critical section in find_task_by_pid_ns().

  ===================================================
  [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
  ---------------------------------------------------
  kernel/pid.c:386 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!

  other info that might help us debug this:

  rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
  1 lock held by rc.sysinit/1102:
   #0:  (tasklist_lock){.+.+..}, at: [<c1048340>] sys_setpgid+0x40/0x160

  stack backtrace:
  Pid: 1102, comm: rc.sysinit Not tainted 2.6.35-rc3-dirty #1
  Call Trace:
   [<c105e714>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0x94/0xb0
   [<c104b4cd>] find_task_by_pid_ns+0x6d/0x70
   [<c104b4e8>] find_task_by_vpid+0x18/0x20
   [<c1048347>] sys_setpgid+0x47/0x160
   [<c1002b50>] sysenter_do_call+0x12/0x36

Commit updated to use a new rcu_lockdep_assert() exported API rather than
the old internal __do_rcu_dereference().

Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

1 files changed, 9 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index b973dea2d6b0..b124bc6a75ad 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -215,7 +215,11 @@ static inline int rcu_read_lock_sched_held(void)
 
 extern int rcu_my_thread_group_empty(void);
 
-#define __do_rcu_dereference_check(c)                                   \
+/**
+ * rcu_lockdep_assert - emit lockdep splat if specified condition not met
+ * @c: condition to check
+ */
+#define rcu_lockdep_assert(c)                                           \
         do {                                                            \
                 static bool __warned;                                   \
                 if (debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled() && !__warned && !(c)) { \
@@ -226,7 +230,7 @@ extern int rcu_my_thread_group_empty(void);
 
 #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
 
-#define __do_rcu_dereference_check(c) do { } while (0)
+#define rcu_lockdep_assert(c) do { } while (0)
 
 #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
 
@@ -247,14 +251,14 @@ extern int rcu_my_thread_group_empty(void);
 #define __rcu_dereference_check(p, c, space) \
         ({ \
                 typeof(*p) *_________p1 = (typeof(*p)*__force )ACCESS_ONCE(p); \
-                __do_rcu_dereference_check(c); \
+                rcu_lockdep_assert(c); \
                 (void) (((typeof (*p) space *)p) == p); \
                 smp_read_barrier_depends(); \
                 ((typeof(*p) __force __kernel *)(_________p1)); \
         })
 #define __rcu_dereference_protected(p, c, space) \
         ({ \
-                __do_rcu_dereference_check(c); \
+                rcu_lockdep_assert(c); \
                 (void) (((typeof (*p) space *)p) == p); \
                 ((typeof(*p) __force __kernel *)(p)); \
         })
@@ -262,7 +266,7 @@ extern int rcu_my_thread_group_empty(void);
 #define __rcu_dereference_index_check(p, c) \
         ({ \
                 typeof(p) _________p1 = ACCESS_ONCE(p); \
-                __do_rcu_dereference_check(c); \
+                rcu_lockdep_assert(c); \
                 smp_read_barrier_depends(); \
                 (_________p1); \
         })