From: "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com,
syzbot <syzbot+5f47a8cea6a12b77a876@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jirislaby@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [syzbot] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context in __might_resched
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 12:35:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5073833.kmqaQDgJIs@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNMNC=3FiBB0aVVP9LXA9-03ug-sE4CqgJu2-sjdxA14TQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tuesday, November 16, 2021 11:24:54 AM CET Marco Elver wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 at 08:57, Fabio M. De Francesco
> <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > I think that this is more readable and comprehensible.
> >
> > Therefore, if I'm not wrong, Marco's "!preemptible()", that is "if (!
> > (preempt_count() == 0 && !irqs_disabled())", might be rewritten to an
easier
> > to understand "if (preempt_count() || irqs_disabled())".
> >
> > Am I wrong? Let's test it...
>
> It's right, but why not use preemptible()? The definition of
> preemptible() might change and then you'd have to fix the code again.
>
> I actually find (preempt_count() || irqs_disabled()) tells me less of
> what your intent here is vs. just writing !preemptible().
>
You are right :)
If we have a macro, there must be a good reason behind its existence. So
let's use it.
For I didn't know that we have that macro, I had to read its definition. Then
I had to understand what means the negation of its parts. It was a bit
difficult to understand, so I thought that open coding if we have preemption
disabled or irqs disabled was easier to understand.
But now I see that, as said, if we have an API we should use it.
I'm preparing a patch and give you proper credit for suggestions.
Thanks,
Fabio M. De Francesco
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-16 11:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-10 10:18 [syzbot] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context in __might_resched syzbot
2021-11-12 12:22 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-11-12 13:58 ` Marco Elver
2021-11-12 16:05 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-11-12 16:27 ` Marco Elver
2021-11-12 17:15 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-11-13 20:13 ` syzbot
2021-11-16 7:57 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-11-16 8:09 ` syzbot
2021-11-16 8:53 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-11-16 8:55 ` syzbot
2021-11-16 9:03 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-11-16 9:03 ` syzbot
2021-11-16 9:20 ` syzbot
2021-11-16 9:13 ` Fabio M. De Francesco
2021-11-16 9:38 ` syzbot
2021-11-16 10:24 ` Marco Elver
2021-11-16 11:35 ` Fabio M. De Francesco [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5073833.kmqaQDgJIs@localhost.localdomain \
--to=fmdefrancesco@gmail.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=syzbot+5f47a8cea6a12b77a876@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.