Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.35 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.35;
Date:   Thu, 28 Sep 2023 10:05:56 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] srcu: Use try-lock lockdep annotation for NMI-safe
 access.
Message-ID: <20230928080556.GE9829@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20230927160231.XRCDDSK4@linutronix.de>
 <ZRUX0YUrXfepRGKE@Boquns-Mac-mini.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZRUX0YUrXfepRGKE@Boquns-Mac-mini.home>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:06:09PM -0700, Boqun Feng wrote:

> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> index e85b5ad3e206..1af8d44e5eb4 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
> @@ -5727,8 +5727,9 @@ void lock_acquire(struct lockdep_map *lock, unsigned int subclass,
>                 return;
> 
>         if (unlikely(!lockdep_enabled())) {
> +               /* Only do NMI context checking if it's a check lock */
>                 /* XXX allow trylock from NMI ?!? */
> -               if (lockdep_nmi() && !trylock) {
> +               if (check && lockdep_nmi() && !trylock) {
>                         struct held_lock hlock;
> 
>                         hlock.acquire_ip = ip;
> 
> Peter, thoughts?
> 

I think I prefer the trylock one. Fundamentally trylock conveys the 'we
wont block' thing. Making 'lock' sometimes work for NMI is just
confusing.