From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: enable stackmap with build_id in nmi
 context
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 17:57:31 +0000
Message-ID: <06FAC793-ADBC-44B1-8CF4-36A8C17730AD@fb.com>
References: <20180502000220.2585320-1-songliubraving@fb.com>
 <20180502092109.GI12180@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <30F32ACF-5155-459B-BD47-5060CCA52788@fb.com>
 <20180502173027.GM12180@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx0b-00082601.pphosted.com ([67.231.153.30]:53860 "EHLO
        mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL)
        by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750849AbeEBR6O (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 2 May 2018 13:58:14 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20180502173027.GM12180@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Content-Language: en-US
Content-ID: <4C9A6E0820730D40A3148B73B98AF91B@namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>



> On May 2, 2018, at 10:30 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>=20
> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 04:48:32PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
>>> It's broken though, I've bet you've never actually ran this with lockde=
p
>>> enabled for example.
>>=20
>> I am not following here. I just run the new selftest with CONFIG_LOCKDEP=
 on,=20
>> and got no warning for this.=20
>=20
> Weird, I would be expecting complaints about releasing an unheld lock.
>=20
> nmi_enter(),nmi_exit() have lockdep_off(),lockdep_on() resp. Which means
> that the down_trylock() will not be recorded. The up, which is done from
> IRQ context, will not be so supressed and should hit
> print_unlock_imbalance_bug().
>=20

I am still not sure whether I am following. I guess your concern apply to=20
spinlock only? lock_acquire() has the following in the beginning:

	if (unlikely(current->lockdep_recursion))
		return;

So it will not run in nmi context?

On the other hand, semaphore and rw_semaphore should be ok in such cases?

Thanks,
Song=