From: "Zqiang" <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>
To: "Bradley Morgan" <brads@mainlining.org>
Cc: boqun@kernel.org, frederic@kernel.org, joelagnelf@nvidia.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org,
paulmck@kernel.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org, urezki@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu-tasks: Warn on too-short RCU Tasks Rude grace period
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 23:41:00 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8d7f265cd1320bf7996bcffea07ffdea69cfd625@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D155FA7E-8E99-4D4F-92A8-74472834F25A@mainlining.org>
>
> On 15 October 2026 10:46:19 BST, Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> >
> > The RCU Tasks Rude grace period is implemented by invoking the
> > schedule_on_each_cpu() with an empty work function, which forces
> > a context switch on every online CPU and guarantees that all
> > rude-tasks read-side critical sections have completed. However,
> > schedule_on_each_cpu() can fail (via alloc_percpu() returning
> > -ENOMEM) and returns immediately, in which case those context
> > switches never happen, too-short grace period happen.
> >
> > This commit therefore wraps the schedule_on_each_cpu() call in
> > WARN_ONCE() so that this failure is reported as a "Too-short
> > grace period" warning.
> >
> NAK, this seems like a edge case, and potentially panicking the system
> with panic on oops doesn't seem right to me, because we would reserve that
> for when something definitely goes really wrong and we need to notify
> the user.
>
> I don't believe this patch should go in for this reason, it's a heavy edge
> case, that doesn't *have* nessesarily need to be accounted for.
Indeed, this is a rare event, so I use WARN_ONCE() to mark it, the WARN_ONCE()
not panicking system unless you set warn_on_oops true, this can help us troubleshoot
UAF issues caused by a too short tasks-rude grace period.
or maybe we can use DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct work_struct, rude_work) to replace
alloc_percpu(struct work_struct) queue to all online CPUs.
Anyway, Thank you for your reply. I would also like to hear the opinions of others.
Thanks
Zqiang
>
> Zqiang, have you reproduced this OOM on your own system, if so, could you
> tell me more details, you may turn my frown into a smiley face ;)
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>
> > ---
> > kernel/rcu/tasks.h | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > index fcac7361ec51..91c25717402e 100644
> > --- a/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tasks.h
> > @@ -1361,7 +1361,8 @@ static void rcu_tasks_be_rude(struct work_struct *work)
> > static void rcu_tasks_rude_wait_gp(struct rcu_tasks *rtp)
> > {
> > rtp->n_ipis += cpumask_weight(cpu_online_mask);
> > - schedule_on_each_cpu(rcu_tasks_be_rude);
> > + WARN_ONCE(schedule_on_each_cpu(rcu_tasks_be_rude),
> > + "%s: Too-short grace period, OOM is now expected behavior!!!\n", rtp->name);
> >
> Good message, makes sense. But I don't think this is right, see above.
>
> >
> > }
> >
> > static void call_rcu_tasks_rude(struct rcu_head *rhp, rcu_callback_t
> > func);
> >
> --- Thanks!
> "I'm not a very positive person" - Linus torvalds
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-16 23:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-15 9:46 [PATCH] rcu-tasks: Warn on too-short RCU Tasks Rude grace period Zqiang
2026-10-15 16:31 ` Bradley Morgan
2026-10-16 23:41 ` Zqiang [this message]
2026-10-17 11:16 ` Bradley Morgan
2026-10-17 12:14 ` Zqiang
2026-10-17 12:20 ` Bradley Morgan
2026-10-17 12:25 ` Bradley Morgan
2026-10-17 13:37 ` Zqiang
2026-10-17 14:08 ` Bradley Morgan
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=8d7f265cd1320bf7996bcffea07ffdea69cfd625@linux.dev \
--to=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=brads@mainlining.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=urezki@gmail.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 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.