Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Implement dtor for struct file BTF ID

[Justin Suess <utilityemal77@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 01:05:35AM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s):
> - [High] bpf_file_release_dtor() directly calls fput(), which is unsafe in NMI context and can lead to a system deadlock.
> --
> 
> commit b9990bf55467191e86e004a62cdb84e6dc71b794
> Author: Justin Suess <utilityemal77@gmail.com>
> 
> bpf: Implement dtor for struct file BTF ID
> 
> This commit implements a destructor for struct file, allowing it to be stored
> in a BPF map as a referenced kptr. The destructor calls fput() to release
> the reference.
> 
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> > index 2bb60200c2665..ee5ceb82e4f81 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> [ ... ]
> > @@ -2752,6 +2753,13 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_task_release_dtor(void *p)
> >  }
> >  CFI_NOSEAL(bpf_task_release_dtor);
> >  
> > +__bpf_kfunc void bpf_file_release_dtor(void *file)
> > +{
> > +	fput((struct file *)file);
> > +}
> 
> Is it safe to call fput() here?
>
> BPF programs can update or delete map elements from NMI context (for example,
> in BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT programs), which will synchronously invoke this
> destructor.
> 
> When fput() is called in an interrupt context, it adds the file to the
> delayed_fput_list and calls schedule_delayed_work(). However,
> schedule_delayed_work() is not NMI-safe, as it attempts to acquire spinlocks
> such as the workqueue pool lock and timer_base->lock.
> 
> If the NMI interrupted a context that already held one of these locks, won't
> this result in a hard deadlock?
> 
> Would it be better to defer releasing the struct file using an NMI-safe
> mechanism, similar to how other BPF destructors handle this?
> 
BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT allows the kfunc bpf_put_file which also just
calls fput().

So if calling fput in BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT is safe for
bpf_put_file, why would it be unsafe in a dtor running in the same
context?

> -- 
> Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260420203306.3107246-1-utilityemal77@gmail.com?part=1