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
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 22:09:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180504200953.GW12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180504190735.izmzibhb66gjb5wr@linutronix.de>
On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 09:07:35PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2018-05-04 20:51:32 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 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.
>
> indeed, now it clicked. Given what I wrote in the cover letter would you
> be in favour of (a proper) lockdep_assert_BH_disabled() or the cheaper
> local_bh_enable() (assuming the network folks don't mind the cheaper
> version)?
Depends a bit on what the code wants I suppose. If the code is in fact
fine with the stronger in-softirq assertion, that'd be best. Otherwise I
don't object to a lockdep_assert_bh_disabled() to accompany the
lockdep_assert_irq_disabled() we already have either.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-04 20:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-04 17:51 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce assert_in_softirq() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-05-04 17:51 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] lockdep: Add a assert_in_softirq() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-05-04 17:51 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] net: mac808211: mac802154: use lockdep_assert_in_softirq() instead own warning Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-05-04 18:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-04 18:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-05-04 18:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-04 19:07 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-05-04 20:09 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2018-05-05 7:06 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20180504200953.GW12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=alex.aring@gmail.com \
--cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stefan@osg.samsung.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox