[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a5a9fb0e-d80d-d81c-b8c8-6ac9fcdb271b@meta.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 21:38:17 -0700
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@...a.com>
To: Ze Gao <zegao2021@...il.com>, Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kafai@...com, kpsingh@...omium.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
paulmck@...nel.org, songliubraving@...com,
Ze Gao <zegao@...cent.com>
Subject: Re:
On 5/21/23 7:07 PM, Ze Gao wrote:
> Oops, I missed that. Thanks for pointing that out, which I thought is
> conditional use of rcu_is_watching before.
>
> One last point, I think we should double check on this
> "fentry does not filter with !rcu_is_watching"
> as quoted from Yonghong and argue whether it needs
> the same check for fentry as well.
I would suggest that we address rcu_is_watching issue for fentry
only if we do have a reproducible case to show something goes wrong...
>
> Regards,
> Ze
Powered by blists - more mailing lists