Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 23 Apr 2019 22:35:12 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: Fix preempt_enable_no_resched() abuse
Message-ID: <20190423203512.GB4038@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20190419131522.GW14281@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <57620139-92a3-4a21-56bd-5d6fff23214f@redhat.com>
 <7b1bfc26-6e90-bd65-ab46-08413acd80e9@redhat.com>
 <20190423141714.GO11158@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAHk-=whnQJ9YDrkcKteNSACMJxzw1bL0RPfGQsey_9Nm7b8mnw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4f62d7f2-e5f6-500e-3e70-b1d1978f7140@redhat.com>
 <20190423193435.GX4038@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <88ba7be0-9ec5-941e-1b3f-80fbe05fe3a0@redhat.com>
 <20190423195559.GY4038@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAHk-=wgopkA+NiFCDOBcc24usK8hwL9CnQGzmv_4j8zJLGTrqA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wgopkA+NiFCDOBcc24usK8hwL9CnQGzmv_4j8zJLGTrqA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 01:27:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 12:56 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > Unless the very next line is schedule(), or implies it, one must not use
> > preempt_enable_no_resched(). It can cause a preemption to go missing and
> > thereby cause arbitrary delays, breaking the PREEMPT=y invariant.
> 
> That language may be a bit strong, or m,aybe the "implies it" might at
> least be extended on.
> 
> It doesn't need to be "schedule()" per se, it can be any of the things
> that check if we _need_ to be scheduled.

I'll try and word-smith that tomorrow, brain is fried. But yes,
something that ends up in schedule() 'soon'.

The usage in ist_exit() is particularly 'fun'. That really should've had
a comment. That relies on the return-from-interrupt path.

> IOW, various variations of "if (need_resched())" exiting a loop, and
> then outside the loop there's a cond_resched() or similar.

That one 'funnily' doesn't actually work; cond_resched() is a no-op on
PREEMPT=y.