netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/4] bpf: Allow using bpf_sk_storage in FENTRY/FEXIT/RAW

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:51:51 -0800
From:   Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, <kernel-team@...com>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/4] bpf: Allow using bpf_sk_storage in
 FENTRY/FEXIT/RAW_TP

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 10:43:40AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:37:49 -0800 Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 10:00:04AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > Locks that can run in any context but preempt disabled or softirq
> > > disabled?  
> > Not exactly. e.g. running from irq won't work.
> > 
> > > Let me cut to the chase. Are you sure you didn't mean to check
> > > if (irq_count()) ?  
> > so, no.
> > 
> > From preempt.h:
> > 
> > /*
> >  * ...
> >  * in_interrupt() - We're in NMI,IRQ,SoftIRQ context or have BH disabled
> >  * ...
> >  */
> > #define in_interrupt()          (irq_count())
> 
> Right, as I said in my correction (in_irq() || in_nmi()).
> 
> Just to spell it out AFAIU in_serving_softirq() will return true when
> softirq is active and interrupted by a hard irq or an NMI.
I see what you have been getting at now.

Good point. will post a fix.