Re: [PATCH 1/2] ftrace: disable preemption on the testing of recursion
From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
Date: 2021-10-12 12:24:51
Also in:
linux-riscv, live-patching, lkml
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/include/linux/trace_recursion.h b/include/linux/trace_recursion.h index a9f9c57..805f9c4 100644 --- a/include/linux/trace_recursion.h +++ b/include/linux/trace_recursion.h@@ -214,7 +214,14 @@ static __always_inline void trace_clear_recursion(int bit) static __always_inline int ftrace_test_recursion_trylock(unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip) { - return trace_test_and_set_recursion(ip, parent_ip, TRACE_FTRACE_START, TRACE_FTRACE_MAX); + int bit; + + preempt_disable_notrace(); + bit = trace_test_and_set_recursion(ip, parent_ip, TRACE_FTRACE_START, TRACE_FTRACE_MAX); + if (bit < 0) + preempt_enable_notrace(); + + return bit; } /**@@ -226,6 +233,7 @@ static __always_inline int ftrace_test_recursion_trylock(unsigned long ip, static __always_inline void ftrace_test_recursion_unlock(int bit) { trace_clear_recursion(bit); + preempt_enable_notrace(); } #endif /* CONFIG_TRACING */diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/patch.c b/kernel/livepatch/patch.c index e8029ae..6e66ccd 100644 --- a/kernel/livepatch/patch.c +++ b/kernel/livepatch/patch.c@@ -52,11 +52,6 @@ static void notrace klp_ftrace_handler(unsigned long ip, bit = ftrace_test_recursion_trylock(ip, parent_ip); if (WARN_ON_ONCE(bit < 0)) return; - /* - * A variant of synchronize_rcu() is used to allow patching functions - * where RCU is not watching, see klp_synchronize_transition(). - */ - preempt_disable_notrace(); func = list_first_or_null_rcu(&ops->func_stack, struct klp_func, stack_node);@@ -120,7 +115,6 @@ static void notrace klp_ftrace_handler(unsigned long ip, klp_arch_set_pc(fregs, (unsigned long)func->new_func); unlock: - preempt_enable_notrace(); ftrace_test_recursion_unlock(bit); }
I don't like this change much. We have preempt_disable there not because of ftrace_test_recursion, but because of RCU. ftrace_test_recursion was added later. Yes, it would work with the change, but it would also hide things which should not be hidden in my opinion. Miroslav