[ Added a subject, as I always want to delete these emails as spam! ] On Mon, 22 May 2023 10:07:42 +0800 Ze Gao <zegao2021@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Oops, I missed that. Thanks for pointing that out, which I thought is > conditional use of rcu_is_watching before. > > One last point, I think we should double check on this > "fentry does not filter with !rcu_is_watching" > as quoted from Yonghong and argue whether it needs > the same check for fentry as well. > Note that trace_test_and_set_recursion() (which is used by ftrace_test_recursion_trylock()) checks for rcu_is_watching() and returns false if it isn't (and the trylock will fail). -- Steve
