From:   "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc:     syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com,
        syzbot <syzbot+5f47a8cea6a12b77a876@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jirislaby@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [syzbot] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context in __might_resched
Date:   Tue, 16 Nov 2021 12:35:27 +0100
Message-ID: <5073833.kmqaQDgJIs@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNMNC=3FiBB0aVVP9LXA9-03ug-sE4CqgJu2-sjdxA14TQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <0000000000003efce905d0b135e6@google.com> <10635720.r0gBeNIlcX@localhost.localdomain> <CANpmjNMNC=3FiBB0aVVP9LXA9-03ug-sE4CqgJu2-sjdxA14TQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tuesday, November 16, 2021 11:24:54 AM CET Marco Elver wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 at 08:57, Fabio M. De Francesco
> <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
> > I think that this is more readable and comprehensible.
> >
> > Therefore, if I'm not wrong, Marco's "!preemptible()", that is "if (!
> > (preempt_count() == 0 && !irqs_disabled())", might be rewritten to an 
easier
> > to understand "if (preempt_count() || irqs_disabled())".
> >
> > Am I wrong? Let's test it...
> 
> It's right, but why not use preemptible()? The definition of
> preemptible() might change and then you'd have to fix the code again.
> 
> I actually find (preempt_count() || irqs_disabled()) tells me less of
> what your intent here is vs. just writing !preemptible().
> 
You are right :)

If we have a macro, there must be a good reason behind its existence. So 
let's use it. 

For I didn't know that we have that macro, I had to read its definition. Then 
I had to understand what means the negation of its parts. It was a bit 
difficult to understand, so I thought that open coding if we have preemption 
disabled or irqs disabled was easier to understand.

But now I see that, as said, if we have an API we should use it.

I'm preparing a patch and give you proper credit for suggestions.

Thanks,

Fabio M. De Francesco