Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoi...@gmail.com> writes: > Puranjay, Andrii and All, > > looks like if (irqs_disabled()) is not enough. > Should we change it to preemptible() ? > > It will likely make it async all the time, > but in this it's an ok trade off? >
Yes, as BPF programs can run in all kinds of contexts. We should replace 'if (irqs_disabled())' with 'if (!preemptible())' because the definition is: #define preemptible() (preempt_count() == 0 && !irqs_disabled()) and we need if ((preempt_count() != 0) || irqs_disabled()), in both these cases we want to make it async. I will try to test the fix as Syzbot has now found a reproducer. Thanks, Puranjay
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
