[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201113123035.tjllvijjzd54npsf@linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:30:35 +0100
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Aleksandr Nogikh <nogikh@...gle.com>,
Nazime Hande Harputluoglu <handeharput@...il.com>,
tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] kcov, usb: only collect coverage from
__usb_hcd_giveback_urb in softirq
On 2020-10-16 15:57:45 [+0200], Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> --- a/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c
> @@ -1646,9 +1646,16 @@ static void __usb_hcd_giveback_urb(struct urb *urb)
>
> /* pass ownership to the completion handler */
> urb->status = status;
> - kcov_remote_start_usb((u64)urb->dev->bus->busnum);
> + /*
> + * This function can be called in task context inside another remote
> + * coverage collection section, but KCOV doesn't support that kind of
> + * recursion yet. Only collect coverage in softirq context for now.
> + */
> + if (in_serving_softirq())
Could this in_serving_softirq() usage be replaced, please?
> + kcov_remote_start_usb((u64)urb->dev->bus->busnum);
> urb->complete(urb);
> - kcov_remote_stop();
> + if (in_serving_softirq())
> + kcov_remote_stop();
>
> usb_anchor_resume_wakeups(anchor);
> atomic_dec(&urb->use_count);
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists