From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: johannes@sipsolutions.net
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, j@w1.fi,
tgraf@suug.ch, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
johannes.berg@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rhashtable: make walk safe from softirq context
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:43:39 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190212.104339.1794719792249723582.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190206090721.8001-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 10:07:21 +0100
> From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
>
> When an rhashtable walk is done from softirq context, we rightfully
> get a lockdep complaint saying that we could get a softirq in the
> middle of a rehash, and thus deadlock on &ht->lock. This happened
> e.g. in mac80211 as it does a walk in softirq context.
>
> Fix this by using spin_lock_bh() wherever we use the &ht->lock.
>
> Initially, I thought it would be sufficient to do this only in the
> rehash (rhashtable_rehash_table), but I changed my mind:
> * the caller doesn't really need to disable softirqs across all
> of the rhashtable_walk_* functions, only those parts that they
> actually do within the lock need it
> * maybe more importantly, it would still lead to massive lockdep
> complaints - false positives, but hard to fix - because lockdep
> wouldn't know about different ht->lock instances, and thus one
> user of the code doing a walk w/o any locking (when it only ever
> uses process context this is fine) vs. another user like in wifi
> where we noticed this problem would still cause it to complain.
>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Reported-by: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
Herbert and Johannes, I need some guidance.
It seems Herbert wants the softirq usage of rhashtables removed, but
since things have been like this for so long that's not the most
reasonable requirement if we can fix it more simply with Johannes's
patch especially for -stable.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-12 18:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-06 9:07 [PATCH v2] rhashtable: make walk safe from softirq context Johannes Berg
2019-02-07 13:40 ` Herbert Xu
2019-02-07 13:50 ` Johannes Berg
2019-02-07 21:48 ` Herbert Xu
2019-02-07 21:56 ` Johannes Berg
2019-02-07 22:02 ` Herbert Xu
2019-02-12 18:43 ` David Miller [this message]
2019-02-12 19:03 ` Johannes Berg
2019-02-12 21:54 ` Bob Copeland
2019-02-13 4:35 ` Herbert Xu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190212.104339.1794719792249723582.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=j@w1.fi \
--cc=johannes.berg@intel.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).