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 Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
