From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751733AbeEDSvs (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 4 May 2018 14:51:48 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:46778 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751445AbeEDSvq (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 4 May 2018 14:51:46 -0400
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 20:51:32 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
        Alexander Aring <alex.aring@gmail.com>,
        Stefan Schmidt <stefan@osg.samsung.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org,
        Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] net: mac808211: mac802154: use
 lockdep_assert_in_softirq() instead own warning
Message-ID: <20180504185132.GV12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20180504175144.12179-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
 <20180504175144.12179-3-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
 <20180504183249.GU12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20180504184538.gavk7e2vtm73e32w@linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180504184538.gavk7e2vtm73e32w@linutronix.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 08:45:39PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2018-05-04 20:32:49 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 07:51:44PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > > From: Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
> > > 
> > > The warning in ieee802154_rx() and ieee80211_rx_napi() is there to ensure
> > > the softirq context for the subsequent netif_receive_skb() call. 
> > 
> > That's not in fact what it does though; so while that might indeed be
> > the intent that's not what it does.
> 
> It was introduced in commit d20ef63d3246 ("mac80211: document
> ieee80211_rx() context requirement"):
> 
>     mac80211: document ieee80211_rx() context requirement
>     
>     ieee80211_rx() must be called with softirqs disabled

softirqs disabled, ack that is exactly what it checks.

But afaict the assertion you introduced tests that we are _in_ softirq
context, which is not the same.