On 2018/10/18 18:08, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2018-10-18 18:00:05 [+0900], Toshiaki Makita wrote:
>> On 2018/10/18 17:47, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>> On 2018-10-17 14:48:02 [+0800], Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2018/10/17 上午9:13, Toshiaki Makita wrote:
>>>>> I'm not sure what condition triggered this warning.
>>>
>>> If the seqlock is acquired once in softirq and then in process context
>>> again it is enough evidence for lockdep to trigger this warning.
>>
>> No. As I said that should not happen because of NAPI guard.
> Again: lockdep saw the lock in softirq context once and in process
> context once and this is what triggers the warning. It does not matter
> if NAPI is enabled or not during the access in process context. If you
> want to allow this you need further lockdep annotation…
> 
> … but: refill_work() disables NAPI for &vi->rq[1] and refills + updates
> stats while NAPI is enabled for &vi->rq[0].

Do you mean this is false positive? rq[0] and rq[1] never race with each
other...

-- 
Toshiaki Makita

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Reply via email to