mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
	Alexander Aring <alex.aring@gmail.com>,
	Stefan Schmidt <stefan@osg.samsung.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Introduce assert_in_softirq()
Date: Fri,  4 May 2018 19:51:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180504175144.12179-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de> (raw)

ieee80211_rx_napi() has a check to ensure that it is invoked in softirq
context / with BH disabled. It is there because it invokes
netif_receive_skb() which has this requirement.
On -RT this check does not work as expected so there is always this
warning.
Tree wide there are two users of this check: ieee80211_rx_napi() and
ieee802154_rx(). This approach introduces assert_in_softirq() which does
the check if lockdep is enabled. This check could then become a nop on
-RT.

As an alternative netif_receive_skb() (or ieee80211_rx_napi() could do
local_bh_disable() / local_bh_enable() unconditionally. The _disable()
part is very cheap. The _enable() part is more expensive because it
includes a function call. We could avoid that jump in the likely case
when BH was already disabled by something like:

 static inline void local_bh_enable(void)
 {
         if (softirq_count() == SOFTIRQ_DISABLE_OFFSET)
                 __local_bh_enable_ip(_THIS_IP_, SOFTIRQ_DISABLE_OFFSET);
         else
                 preempt_count_sub(SOFTIRQ_DISABLE_OFFSET);
 }

Which would make bh_enable() cheaper for everyone.

Sebastian

             reply	other threads:[~2018-05-04 17:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-04 17:51 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2018-05-04 17:51 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] lockdep: Add a assert_in_softirq() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-05-04 17:51 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] net: mac808211: mac802154: use lockdep_assert_in_softirq() instead own warning Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-05-04 18:32   ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-04 18:45     ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-05-04 18:51       ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-04 19:07         ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2018-05-04 20:09           ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-05-05  7:06           ` Ingo Molnar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180504175144.12179-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=alex.aring@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stefan@osg.samsung.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®