From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: 'Alexei Starovoitov ' <ast@kernel.org>,
'Andrii Nakryiko ' <andrii@kernel.org>,
'Daniel Borkmann ' <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf 2/3] bpf: bpf_sk_storage: Fix the missing uncharge in sk_omem_alloc
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2023 16:11:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230901231129.578493-3-martin.lau@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230901231129.578493-1-martin.lau@linux.dev>
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
The commit c83597fa5dc6 ("bpf: Refactor some inode/task/sk storage functions for reuse"),
refactored the bpf_{sk,task,inode}_storage_free() into
bpf_local_storage_unlink_nolock() which then later renamed
to bpf_local_storage_destroy(). The commit accidentally passed the
"bool uncharge_mem = false" argument to bpf_selem_unlink_storage_nolock()
which then stopped the uncharge from happening to the sk->sk_omem_alloc.
This missing uncharge only happens when the sk is going away (during
__sk_destruct).
This patch fixes it by always passing "uncharge_mem = true". It is a
noop to the task/inode/cgroup storage because they do not have the
map_local_storage_(un)charge enabled in the map_ops. A followup patch will
be done in bpf-next to remove the uncharge_mem argument.
A selftest is added in the next patch.
Fixes: c83597fa5dc6 ("bpf: Refactor some inode/task/sk storage functions for reuse")
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
---
kernel/bpf/bpf_local_storage.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_local_storage.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_local_storage.c
index 37ad47d52dc5..146824cc9689 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_local_storage.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_local_storage.c
@@ -760,7 +760,7 @@ void bpf_local_storage_destroy(struct bpf_local_storage *local_storage)
* of the loop will set the free_cgroup_storage to true.
*/
free_storage = bpf_selem_unlink_storage_nolock(
- local_storage, selem, false, true);
+ local_storage, selem, true, true);
}
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&local_storage->lock, flags);
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-01 23:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-01 23:11 [PATCH bpf 0/3] bpf: Fixes for bpf_sk_storage Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-01 23:11 ` [PATCH bpf 1/3] bpf: bpf_sk_storage: Fix invalid wait context lockdep report Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-01 23:11 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2023-09-01 23:11 ` [PATCH bpf 3/3] selftests/bpf: Check bpf_sk_storage has uncharged sk_omem_alloc Martin KaFai Lau
2023-09-06 9:10 ` [PATCH bpf 0/3] bpf: Fixes for bpf_sk_storage patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20230901231129.578493-3-martin.lau@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.