[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200220204618.320890020@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 21:45:27 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Sebastian Sewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: [patch V2 10/20] trace/bpf: Use migrate disable in trace_call_bpf()
BPF does not require preemption disable. It only requires to stay on the
same CPU while running a program. Reflect this by replacing
preempt_disable/enable() with migrate_disable/enable() pairs.
On a non-RT kernel this maps to preempt_disable/enable().
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
---
kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ unsigned int trace_call_bpf(struct trace
if (in_nmi()) /* not supported yet */
return 1;
- preempt_disable();
+ migrate_disable();
if (unlikely(__this_cpu_inc_return(bpf_prog_active) != 1)) {
/*
@@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ unsigned int trace_call_bpf(struct trace
out:
__this_cpu_dec(bpf_prog_active);
- preempt_enable();
+ migrate_enable();
return ret;
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists