[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221209153445.22182ca5@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2022 15:34:45 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...a.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Hao Sun <sunhao.th@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>
Subject: Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request in
bpf_dispatcher_xdp
On Sat, 10 Dec 2022 00:32:07 +0100 Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> fwiw, these should not be necessary, Documentation/RCU/checklist.rst :
>
> [...] One example of non-obvious pairing is the XDP feature in networking,
> which calls BPF programs from network-driver NAPI (softirq) context. BPF
> relies heavily on RCU protection for its data structures, but because the
> BPF program invocation happens entirely within a single local_bh_disable()
> section in a NAPI poll cycle, this usage is safe. The reason that this usage
> is safe is that readers can use anything that disables BH when updaters use
> call_rcu() or synchronize_rcu(). [...]
FWIW I sent a link to the thread to Paul and he confirmed
the RCU will wait for just the BH.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists