All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: [PATCH net-next] net: Add lockdep asserts to ____napi_schedule().
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2022 16:03:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YitkzkjU5zng7jAM@linutronix.de> (raw)

____napi_schedule() needs to be invoked with disabled interrupts due to
__raise_softirq_irqoff (in order not to corrupt the per-CPU list).
____napi_schedule() needs also to be invoked from an interrupt context
so that the raised-softirq is processed while the interrupt context is
left.

Add lockdep asserts for both conditions.
While this is the second time the irq/softirq check is needed, provide a
generic lockdep_assert_softirq_will_run() which is used by both caller.

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
---
This is my todo from
   https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220203170901.52ccfd09@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com

- It was suggested to add this to __napi_schedule(),
  __napi_schedule_irqoff but both end up here in ____napi_schedule().

- It was suggested to do lockdep_assert_softirq_will_run(). Done plus
  moved the other caller.

While adding this, I stumbled over lockdep_assert_in_softirq(). This
really special casing things and builds upon assumptions. It took me a
while to figure what is going on. I would suggest to remove it and as a
replacement add lockdep annotations (as in spin_acquire()) around
`napi_alloc_cache' access which is the thing the annotation cares about.
And then the lockdep_assert_in_softirq() can be replaced with a
might_lock() so in the end we know why do what we do. Lockdep will yell
if the lock has been observed in-hardirq and in-softirq without
disabling interrupts.
Sounds good?

---
 include/linux/lockdep.h | 7 +++++++
 net/core/dev.c          | 5 ++++-
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/lockdep.h b/include/linux/lockdep.h
index 467b94257105e..0cc65d2167015 100644
--- a/include/linux/lockdep.h
+++ b/include/linux/lockdep.h
@@ -329,6 +329,12 @@ extern void lock_unpin_lock(struct lockdep_map *lock, struct pin_cookie);
 
 #define lockdep_assert_none_held_once()		\
 	lockdep_assert_once(!current->lockdep_depth)
+/*
+ * Ensure that softirq is handled within the callchain and not delayed and
+ * handled by chance.
+ */
+#define lockdep_assert_softirq_will_run()	\
+	lockdep_assert_once(hardirq_count() | softirq_count())
 
 #define lockdep_recursing(tsk)	((tsk)->lockdep_recursion)
 
@@ -414,6 +420,7 @@ extern int lockdep_is_held(const void *);
 #define lockdep_assert_held_read(l)		do { (void)(l); } while (0)
 #define lockdep_assert_held_once(l)		do { (void)(l); } while (0)
 #define lockdep_assert_none_held_once()	do { } while (0)
+#define lockdep_assert_softirq_will_run()	do { } while (0)
 
 #define lockdep_recursing(tsk)			(0)
 
diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
index ba69ddf85af6b..dbda85879f6c1 100644
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -4267,6 +4267,9 @@ static inline void ____napi_schedule(struct softnet_data *sd,
 {
 	struct task_struct *thread;
 
+	lockdep_assert_softirq_will_run();
+	lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
+
 	if (test_bit(NAPI_STATE_THREADED, &napi->state)) {
 		/* Paired with smp_mb__before_atomic() in
 		 * napi_enable()/dev_set_threaded().
@@ -4874,7 +4877,7 @@ int __netif_rx(struct sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	int ret;
 
-	lockdep_assert_once(hardirq_count() | softirq_count());
+	lockdep_assert_softirq_will_run();
 
 	trace_netif_rx_entry(skb);
 	ret = netif_rx_internal(skb);
-- 
2.35.1


             reply	other threads:[~2022-03-11 15:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-11 15:03 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2022-03-14 10:40 ` [PATCH net-next] net: Add lockdep asserts to ____napi_schedule() patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2022-03-17 19:21 ` Saeed Mahameed
2022-03-18 10:05   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-03-18  1:48 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-03-18 10:57   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2022-03-18 18:19     ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-03-18 18:59       ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-19  0:41         ` Jason A. Donenfeld

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=YitkzkjU5zng7jAM@linutronix.de \
    --to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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.