Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-151047-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 23:18:48 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Tissoires <bentiss@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>, 
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, 
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, 
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>, 
	KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>, 
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Mykola Lysenko <mykolal@fb.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, 
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 17/18] bpf: add bpf_wq_start
Message-ID: <khz5omyjsd2iklm66bi3na4gdxw2cpwhb3c2xwu4fjxkaefi77@puck4pfltjgm>
References: <20240416-bpf_wq-v1-0-c9e66092f842@kernel.org>
 <20240416-bpf_wq-v1-17-c9e66092f842@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240416-bpf_wq-v1-17-c9e66092f842@kernel.org>

On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 04:08:30PM +0200, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> again, copy/paste from bpf_timer_start().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <bentiss@kernel.org>
> ---
>  kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> index e5c8adc44619..ed5309a37eda 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> @@ -2728,6 +2728,29 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_wq_init(struct bpf_wq *wq, void *map, unsigned int flags)
>  	return __bpf_async_init(async, map, flags, BPF_ASYNC_TYPE_WQ);
>  }
>  
> +__bpf_kfunc int bpf_wq_start(struct bpf_wq *wq, unsigned int flags)
> +{
> +	struct bpf_async_kern *async = (struct bpf_async_kern *)wq;
> +	struct bpf_work *w;
> +	int ret = 0;
> +
> +	if (in_nmi())
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +	if (flags)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	__bpf_spin_lock_irqsave(&async->lock);
> +	w = async->work;
> +	if (!w || !w->cb.prog) {
> +		ret = -EINVAL;
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
> +	schedule_work(&w->work);
> +out:
> +	__bpf_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&async->lock);

Looks like you're not adding wq_cancel kfunc in this patch set and
it's probably a good thing not to expose async cancel to bpf users,
since it's a foot gun.
Even when we eventually add wq_cancel_sync kfunc it will not be
removing a callback.
So we can drop spinlock here.
READ_ONCE of w and cb would be enough.
Since they cannot get back to NULL once init-ed and cb is set.