From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] net: mac808211: mac802154: use lockdep_assert_in_softirq() instead own warning Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 20:51:32 +0200 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 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, Ingo Molnar , "David S. Miller" , Johannes Berg , Alexander Aring , Stefan Schmidt , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org, Anna-Maria Gleixner To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180504184538.gavk7e2vtm73e32w@linutronix.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.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 > > > > > > 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.