From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org
To: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, songliubraving@meta.com,
kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/9] bpf: Avoid unnecessary deadlock detection and failure in task storage
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 06:20:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <166676521746.14139.9157565176154592937.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221025184524.3526117-1-martin.lau@linux.dev>
Hello:
This series was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2022 11:45:15 -0700 you wrote:
> From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
>
> The commit bc235cdb423a ("bpf: Prevent deadlock from recursive bpf_task_storage_[get|delete]")
> added deadlock detection to avoid a tracing program from recurring
> on the bpf_task_storage_{get,delete}() helpers. These helpers acquire
> a spin lock and it will lead to deadlock.
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [bpf-next,1/9] bpf: Remove prog->active check for bpf_lsm and bpf_iter
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/271de525e1d7
- [bpf-next,2/9] bpf: Append _recur naming to the bpf_task_storage helper proto
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/0593dd34e534
- [bpf-next,3/9] bpf: Refactor the core bpf_task_storage_get logic into a new function
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/6d65500c34d8
- [bpf-next,4/9] bpf: Avoid taking spinlock in bpf_task_storage_get if potential deadlock is detected
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/e8b02296a6b8
- [bpf-next,5/9] bpf: Add new bpf_task_storage_get proto with no deadlock detection
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/4279adb094a1
- [bpf-next,6/9] bpf: bpf_task_storage_delete_recur does lookup first before the deadlock check
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/fda64ae0bb3e
- [bpf-next,7/9] bpf: Add new bpf_task_storage_delete proto with no deadlock detection
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/8a7dac37f27a
- [bpf-next,8/9] selftests/bpf: Ensure no task storage failure for bpf_lsm.s prog due to deadlock detection
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/0334b4d8822a
- [bpf-next,9/9] selftests/bpf: Tracing prog can still do lookup under busy lock
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/387b532138ee
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-26 6:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-25 18:45 [PATCH bpf-next 0/9] bpf: Avoid unnecessary deadlock detection and failure in task storage Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-25 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/9] bpf: Remove prog->active check for bpf_lsm and bpf_iter Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-25 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/9] bpf: Append _recur naming to the bpf_task_storage helper proto Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-25 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/9] bpf: Refactor the core bpf_task_storage_get logic into a new function Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-25 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/9] bpf: Avoid taking spinlock in bpf_task_storage_get if potential deadlock is detected Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-25 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/9] bpf: Add new bpf_task_storage_get proto with no deadlock detection Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-25 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next 6/9] bpf: bpf_task_storage_delete_recur does lookup first before the deadlock check Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-25 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next 7/9] bpf: Add new bpf_task_storage_delete proto with no deadlock detection Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-25 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next 8/9] selftests/bpf: Ensure no task storage failure for bpf_lsm.s prog due to " Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-25 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next 9/9] selftests/bpf: Tracing prog can still do lookup under busy lock Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-26 6:20 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf [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=166676521746.14139.9157565176154592937.git-patchwork-notify@kernel.org \
--to=patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=songliubraving@meta.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox