From: Mykyta Yatsenko <mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, kafai@meta.com, kernel-team@meta.com,
eddyz87@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com
Cc: Mykyta Yatsenko <yatsenko@meta.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Migrate bpf_task_work to kmalloc_nolock
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2026 15:27:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260330-kmalloc_special-v2-1-c90403f92ff0@meta.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260330-kmalloc_special-v2-0-c90403f92ff0@meta.com>
From: Mykyta Yatsenko <yatsenko@meta.com>
Replace bpf_mem_alloc/bpf_mem_free with
kmalloc_nolock/kfree_rcu for bpf_task_work_ctx.
Replace guard(rcu_tasks_trace)() with guard(rcu)() in
bpf_task_work_irq(). The function only accesses ctx struct members
(not map values), so tasks trace protection is not needed - regular
RCU is sufficient since ctx is freed via kfree_rcu. The guard in
bpf_task_work_callback() remains as tasks trace since it accesses map
values from process context.
Sleepable BPF programs hold rcu_read_lock_trace but not
regular rcu_read_lock. Since kfree_rcu
waits for a regular RCU grace period, the ctx memory can be freed
while a sleepable program is still running. Add scoped_guard(rcu)
around the pointer read and refcount tryget in
bpf_task_work_acquire_ctx to close this race window.
Since kfree_rcu uses call_rcu internally which is not safe from
NMI context, defer destruction via irq_work when irqs are disabled.
For the lost-cmpxchg path the ctx was never published, so
kfree_nolock is safe.
Signed-off-by: Mykyta Yatsenko <yatsenko@meta.com>
---
kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index cb6d242bd093..4c3011ef631f 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -4165,17 +4165,25 @@ static bool bpf_task_work_ctx_tryget(struct bpf_task_work_ctx *ctx)
return refcount_inc_not_zero(&ctx->refcnt);
}
+static void bpf_task_work_destroy(struct irq_work *irq_work)
+{
+ struct bpf_task_work_ctx *ctx = container_of(irq_work, struct bpf_task_work_ctx, irq_work);
+
+ bpf_task_work_ctx_reset(ctx);
+ kfree_rcu(ctx, rcu);
+}
+
static void bpf_task_work_ctx_put(struct bpf_task_work_ctx *ctx)
{
if (!refcount_dec_and_test(&ctx->refcnt))
return;
- bpf_task_work_ctx_reset(ctx);
-
- /* bpf_mem_free expects migration to be disabled */
- migrate_disable();
- bpf_mem_free(&bpf_global_ma, ctx);
- migrate_enable();
+ if (irqs_disabled()) {
+ ctx->irq_work = IRQ_WORK_INIT(bpf_task_work_destroy);
+ irq_work_queue(&ctx->irq_work);
+ } else {
+ bpf_task_work_destroy(&ctx->irq_work);
+ }
}
static void bpf_task_work_cancel(struct bpf_task_work_ctx *ctx)
@@ -4229,7 +4237,7 @@ static void bpf_task_work_irq(struct irq_work *irq_work)
enum bpf_task_work_state state;
int err;
- guard(rcu_tasks_trace)();
+ guard(rcu)();
if (cmpxchg(&ctx->state, BPF_TW_PENDING, BPF_TW_SCHEDULING) != BPF_TW_PENDING) {
bpf_task_work_ctx_put(ctx);
@@ -4251,9 +4259,9 @@ static void bpf_task_work_irq(struct irq_work *irq_work)
/*
* It's technically possible for just scheduled task_work callback to
* complete running by now, going SCHEDULING -> RUNNING and then
- * dropping its ctx refcount. Instead of capturing extra ref just to
- * protected below ctx->state access, we rely on RCU protection to
- * perform below SCHEDULING -> SCHEDULED attempt.
+ * dropping its ctx refcount. Instead of capturing an extra ref just
+ * to protect below ctx->state access, we rely on rcu_read_lock
+ * above to prevent kfree_rcu from freeing ctx before we return.
*/
state = cmpxchg(&ctx->state, BPF_TW_SCHEDULING, BPF_TW_SCHEDULED);
if (state == BPF_TW_FREED)
@@ -4270,7 +4278,7 @@ static struct bpf_task_work_ctx *bpf_task_work_fetch_ctx(struct bpf_task_work *t
if (ctx)
return ctx;
- ctx = bpf_mem_alloc(&bpf_global_ma, sizeof(struct bpf_task_work_ctx));
+ ctx = bpf_map_kmalloc_nolock(map, sizeof(*ctx), 0, NUMA_NO_NODE);
if (!ctx)
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
@@ -4284,7 +4292,7 @@ static struct bpf_task_work_ctx *bpf_task_work_fetch_ctx(struct bpf_task_work *t
* tw->ctx is set by concurrent BPF program, release allocated
* memory and try to reuse already set context.
*/
- bpf_mem_free(&bpf_global_ma, ctx);
+ kfree_nolock(ctx);
return old_ctx;
}
@@ -4296,13 +4304,23 @@ static struct bpf_task_work_ctx *bpf_task_work_acquire_ctx(struct bpf_task_work
{
struct bpf_task_work_ctx *ctx;
- ctx = bpf_task_work_fetch_ctx(tw, map);
- if (IS_ERR(ctx))
- return ctx;
-
- /* try to get ref for task_work callback to hold */
- if (!bpf_task_work_ctx_tryget(ctx))
- return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
+ /*
+ * Sleepable BPF programs hold rcu_read_lock_trace but not
+ * regular rcu_read_lock. Since kfree_rcu waits for regular
+ * RCU GP, the ctx can be freed while we're between reading
+ * the pointer and incrementing the refcount. Take regular
+ * rcu_read_lock to prevent kfree_rcu from freeing the ctx
+ * before we can tryget it.
+ */
+ scoped_guard(rcu) {
+ ctx = bpf_task_work_fetch_ctx(tw, map);
+ if (IS_ERR(ctx))
+ return ctx;
+
+ /* try to get ref for task_work callback to hold */
+ if (!bpf_task_work_ctx_tryget(ctx))
+ return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
+ }
if (cmpxchg(&ctx->state, BPF_TW_STANDBY, BPF_TW_PENDING) != BPF_TW_STANDBY) {
/* lost acquiring race or map_release_uref() stole it from us, put ref and bail */
--
2.52.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-30 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-30 22:27 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] bpf: Migrate bpf_task_work and file dynptr to kmalloc_nolock Mykyta Yatsenko
2026-03-30 22:27 ` Mykyta Yatsenko [this message]
2026-03-31 0:00 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Migrate bpf_task_work " Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-31 10:29 ` Mykyta Yatsenko
2026-03-31 0:58 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-03-30 22:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpf: Migrate dynptr file " Mykyta Yatsenko
2026-03-31 0:01 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-31 0:58 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-04-02 16:40 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] bpf: Migrate bpf_task_work and file dynptr " 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=20260330-kmalloc_special-v2-1-c90403f92ff0@meta.com \
--to=mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=kafai@meta.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=yatsenko@meta.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