lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jan]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm/util.c: Make kvfree() safe for calling while holding spinlocks
On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 20:48:28 +0100 Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com> wrote:

> One codepath in find_alloc_undo() calls kvfree() while holding a spinlock.
> Since vfree() can sleep this is a bug.
>
> Previously, the code path used kfree(), and kfree() is safe to be called
> while holding a spinlock.
>
> Minghao proposed to fix this by updating find_alloc_undo().
>
> Alternate proposal to fix this: Instead of changing find_alloc_undo(),
> change kvfree() so that the same rules as for kfree() apply:
> Having different rules for kfree() and kvfree() just asks for bugs.
>
> Disadvantage: Releasing vmalloc'ed memory will be delayed a bit.

I know we've been around this loop a bunch of times and deferring was
considered. But I forget the conclusion. IIRC, mhocko was involved?

> --- a/mm/util.c
> +++ b/mm/util.c
> @@ -610,12 +610,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvmalloc_node);
> * It is slightly more efficient to use kfree() or vfree() if you are certain
> * that you know which one to use.
> *
> - * Context: Either preemptible task context or not-NMI interrupt.
> + * Context: Any context except NMI interrupt.
> */
> void kvfree(const void *addr)
> {
> if (is_vmalloc_addr(addr))
> - vfree(addr);
> + vfree_atomic(addr);
> else
> kfree(addr);
> }


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-01-27 03:55    [W:0.125 / U:0.444 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site