Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next v2 7/7] net: skbuff: always try to recycle PP
 pages directly when in softirq
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>
CC:     "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>,
        Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@intel.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@fb.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
        Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>,
        <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20230714170853.866018-1-aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>
 <20230714170853.866018-10-aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>
 <20230718174042.67c02449@kernel.org>
 <d7cd1903-de0e-0fe3-eb15-0146b589c7b0@intel.com>
 <20230719135150.4da2f0ff@kernel.org>
 <48c1d70b-d4bd-04c0-ab46-d04eaeaf4af0@intel.com>
 <20230720101231.7a5ff6cd@kernel.org>
 <8e65c3d3-c628-2176-2fc2-a1bc675ad607@intel.com>
 <20230720110027.4bd43ee7@kernel.org>
 <988fc62d-2329-1560-983a-79ff5653a6a6@intel.com>
 <b3884ff9-d903-948d-797a-1830a39b1e71@intel.com>
 <20230720122015.1e7efc21@kernel.org>
 <e542f6b5-4eea-5ac6-a034-47e9f92dbf7e@intel.com>
 <20230720124647.413363d5@kernel.org>
From:   Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <406885ee-8dd0-1654-ec13-914ed8986c24@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jul 2023 19:53:33 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20230720124647.413363d5@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2023/7/21 3:46, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jul 2023 21:33:40 +0200 Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>>> We can as well check
>>> 	(in_softirq() && !irqs_disabled() && !in_hardirq())
>>> ?  
>>
>> Yes, something like that. Messy, but I see no other options...
>>
>> So, I guess you want to add an assertion to make sure that we're *not*
>> in this:
>>
>> in_hardirq() || irqs_disabled()
>>
>> Does this mean that after it's added, my patch is sane? :p
> 
> Well... it's acceptable. Make sure you add a good, informative
> but concise comment :)
> 

Does it mean ptr_ring_produce_any() is needed in
page_pool_recycle_in_ring() too?

As it is assumed that page pool API can be called in the context with
irqs_disabled() || in_hardirq(), and force recylcling happens in the
prt_ring.

Isn't it conflit with the below patch? as the below patch assume page
pool API can not be called in the context with irqs_disabled() || in_hardirq():
[PATCH net-next] page_pool: add a lockdep check for recycling in hardirq

Or am I missing something obvious here?