Re: [PATCH] rcu: update: Check rcu_bh_lock_map state in rcu_read_lock_bh_held

From: Paul E. McKenney
Date: Tue Jun 22 2021 - 13:59:42 EST


On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 05:35:21PM +0530, Neeraj Upadhyay wrote:
> In addition to irq and softirq state, check rcu_bh_lock_map
> state, to decide whether RCU bh lock is held.
>
> Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

My initial reaction was that "in_softirq() || irqs_disabled()" covers
it because rcu_read_lock_bh() disables BH. But you are right that it
does seem a bit silly to ignore lockdep.

So would it also make sense to have a WARN_ON_ONCE() if lockdep claims
we are under rcu_read_lock_bh() protection, but "in_softirq() ||
irqs_disabled()" think otherwise?

Thanx, Paul

> ---
> kernel/rcu/update.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/update.c b/kernel/rcu/update.c
> index c21b38c..d416f1c 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/update.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/update.c
> @@ -333,7 +333,7 @@ int rcu_read_lock_bh_held(void)
>
> if (rcu_read_lock_held_common(&ret))
> return ret;
> - return in_softirq() || irqs_disabled();
> + return lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map) || in_softirq() || irqs_disabled();
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_read_lock_bh_held);
>
> --
> QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
> hosted by The Linux Foundation
>