Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 23 Feb 2021 12:06:22 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Cc:     bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
        kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 2/6] bpf: prevent deadlock from recursive
 bpf_task_storage_[get|delete]
Message-ID: <YDThrlixVqfHP7I9@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20210223012014.2087583-1-songliubraving@fb.com>
 <20210223012014.2087583-3-songliubraving@fb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210223012014.2087583-3-songliubraving@fb.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 05:20:10PM -0800, Song Liu wrote:
> BPF helpers bpf_task_storage_[get|delete] could hold two locks:
> bpf_local_storage_map_bucket->lock and bpf_local_storage->lock. Calling
> these helpers from fentry/fexit programs on functions in bpf_*_storage.c
> may cause deadlock on either locks.
> 
> Prevent such deadlock with a per cpu counter, bpf_task_storage_busy, which
> is similar to bpf_prog_active. We need this counter to be global, because

So bpf_prog_active is one of the biggest turds around, and now you're
making it worse ?!