Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753396AbbKBJAQ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 2 Nov 2015 04:00:16 -0500
Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:37837 "EHLO
	Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753330AbbKBJAM (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 2 Nov 2015 04:00:12 -0500
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:59:27 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, Yang Shi <yang.shi@linaro.org>,
        ast@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: convert hashtab lock to raw lock
In-Reply-To: <20151101225620.GA28272@Alexeis-MacBook-Pro.local>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1511020959030.4032@nanos>
References: <1446243386-26582-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linaro.org> <20151031000356.GA28070@Alexeis-MacBook-Pro.local> <20151031094736.494427d7@grimm.local.home> <20151101225620.GA28272@Alexeis-MacBook-Pro.local>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0
X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: -
X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required,  ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1846
Lines: 47

On Sun, 1 Nov 2015, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 09:47:36AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:03:58 -0700
> > Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 03:16:26PM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > > When running bpf samples on rt kernel, it reports the below warning:
> > > > 
> > > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:917
> > > > in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 128, pid: 477, name: ping
> > > > Preemption disabled at:[<ffff80000017db58>] kprobe_perf_func+0x30/0x228  
> > > ...
> > > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> > > > index 83c209d..972b76b 100644
> > > > --- a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> > > > +++ b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> > > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
> > > >  struct bpf_htab {
> > > >  	struct bpf_map map;
> > > >  	struct hlist_head *buckets;
> > > > -	spinlock_t lock;
> > > > +	raw_spinlock_t lock;  
> > > 
> > > How do we address such things in general?
> > > I bet there are tons of places around the kernel that
> > > call spin_lock from atomic.
> > > I'd hate to lose the benefits of lockdep of non-raw spin_lock
> > > just to make rt happy.
> > 
> > You wont lose any benefits of lockdep. Lockdep still checks
> > raw_spin_lock(). The only difference between raw_spin_lock and
> > spin_lock is that in -rt spin_lock turns into an rt_mutex() and
> > raw_spin_lock stays a spin lock.
> 
> I see. The patch makes sense then.
> Would be good to document this peculiarity of spin_lock.

I'm working on a document.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/