From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
bridge@lists.linux.dev, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>, Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@netapp.com>,
Dai Ngo <Dai.Ngo@oracle.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] replace call_rcu by kfree_rcu for simple kmem_cache_free callback
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 05:47:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <80e03b02-7e24-4342-af0b-ba5117b19828@paulmck-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZmrfA1p2zSVIaYam@zx2c4.com>
On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 01:58:59PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 03:37:55PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 02:33:05PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > On Sun, 9 Jun 2024 10:27:12 +0200 Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > Since SLOB was removed, it is not necessary to use call_rcu
> > > > when the callback only performs kmem_cache_free. Use
> > > > kfree_rcu() directly.
> > > >
> > > > The changes were done using the following Coccinelle semantic patch.
> > > > This semantic patch is designed to ignore cases where the callback
> > > > function is used in another way.
> > >
> > > How does the discussion on:
> > > [PATCH] Revert "batman-adv: prefer kfree_rcu() over call_rcu() with free-only callbacks"
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240612133357.2596-1-linus.luessing@c0d3.blue/
> > > reflect on this series? IIUC we should hold off..
> >
> > We do need to hold off for the ones in kernel modules (such as 07/14)
> > where the kmem_cache is destroyed during module unload.
> >
> > OK, I might as well go through them...
> >
> > [PATCH 01/14] wireguard: allowedips: replace call_rcu by kfree_rcu for simple kmem_cache_free callback
> > Needs to wait, see wg_allowedips_slab_uninit().
>
> Also, notably, this patch needs additionally:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireguard/allowedips.c b/drivers/net/wireguard/allowedips.c
> index e4e1638fce1b..c95f6937c3f1 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireguard/allowedips.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireguard/allowedips.c
> @@ -377,7 +377,6 @@ int __init wg_allowedips_slab_init(void)
>
> void wg_allowedips_slab_uninit(void)
> {
> - rcu_barrier();
> kmem_cache_destroy(node_cache);
> }
>
> Once kmem_cache_destroy has been fixed to be deferrable.
>
> I assume the other patches are similar -- an rcu_barrier() can be
> removed. So some manual meddling of these might be in order.
Assuming that the deferrable kmem_cache_destroy() is the option chosen,
agreed.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-13 12:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-09 8:27 Julia Lawall
2024-06-09 8:27 ` [PATCH 01/14] wireguard: allowedips: " Julia Lawall
2024-06-09 14:32 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-09 14:36 ` Julia Lawall
2024-06-10 20:38 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-10 20:59 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-12 21:33 ` [PATCH 00/14] " Jakub Kicinski
2024-06-12 22:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-12 22:46 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-06-12 22:52 ` Jens Axboe
2024-06-12 23:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-12 23:31 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 0:31 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 3:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 12:22 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 12:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 14:11 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 15:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-17 15:10 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-17 16:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-17 17:23 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-17 18:42 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 21:08 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-18 9:31 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-18 16:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-18 17:21 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-18 17:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-19 9:28 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-19 16:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-21 9:32 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-07-15 20:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-24 13:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-07-24 14:40 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-08 16:41 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-08 20:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-10-09 17:08 ` Julia Lawall
2024-10-09 21:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-19 9:51 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-19 9:56 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-19 11:22 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 18:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-17 21:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-13 14:17 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-06-13 14:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 11:58 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 12:47 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2024-06-13 13:06 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-13 15:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 17:38 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-13 17:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 17:58 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-13 18:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-14 12:35 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-14 14:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-14 14:50 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-14 19:33 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-17 13:50 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 14:56 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-17 16:30 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 16:33 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-17 16:38 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-17 17:04 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-17 21:19 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-17 16:42 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 16:57 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-17 17:19 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 14:37 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-08 16:36 ` Vlastimil Babka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=80e03b02-7e24-4342-af0b-ba5117b19828@paulmck-laptop \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=Dai.Ngo@oracle.com \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=Julia.Lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=bridge@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
--cc=ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kolga@netapp.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=tom@talpey.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).