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:   Wed, 2 Oct 2019 18:50:43 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Viktor Rosendahl <viktor.rosendahl@gmail.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] ftrace: Implement fs notification for
 tracing_max_latency
Message-ID: <20191002185043.298fa820@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <fc1de769-a00e-b7cc-50cb-796560d79d89@gmail.com>
References: <20190920152219.12920-1-viktor.rosendahl@gmail.com>
        <20190920152219.12920-2-viktor.rosendahl@gmail.com>
        <20191002111324.7590bf6d@gandalf.local.home>
        <fc1de769-a00e-b7cc-50cb-796560d79d89@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 00:04:56 +0200
Viktor Rosendahl <viktor.rosendahl@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Can fsnotify() be called from irq context? If so, why have the work
> > queue at all? Just do the work from the irq_work handler.
> >   
> 
> fsnotify() might sleep. It calls send_to_group(), which calls 
> inotify_handle_event() through a function pointer.
> 
> inotify_handle_event() calls kmalloc() without the GFP_ATOMIC flag.
> 
> There might be other reasons as well but the above is one that I have 
> seen a warning for, when enabling CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP and trying 
> to call fsnotify() from an atomic context.

Thanks for the context. I wonder if we should add a "might_sleep()" to
fsnotify() then.

-- Steve