From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-lj1-f169.google.com (mail-lj1-f169.google.com [209.85.208.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69BE44A0F for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2024 13:07:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.208.169 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718284022; cv=none; b=hIwEX/DP2o+qv4BuRvPBD1i+oMpoGpP6CFaQQRSMOcirbRUmjHkt755Dh5yaqH+DgViUmFR2T2EXDqNwmrfHLfpWSPqZS+ERx4Cx3XQ29xjM2ChecSZ2PXgM/g89tJKZAqqNSJof49i1j7vjR0h8ekme+htQk36k+T7CE4UgUR0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718284022; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xu1792XvTnU3jDP3FYbYyhez1VlS5TvvwKQ4Hm46MoY=; h=From:Date:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=N9ioAXRGnjzSuZU8Cpr+NBwmhHjKzaLVWWQMnvaLMMC4IdGEj5JsrArtA9rAKOObVbYlK2/wHem9pszShQ1jj13qAIXq+It39wVUuHC4vX243zhf4Ml2JJfgNOTn5Sl/5e/6GwTqc6L4TaOTdbEEaCDIb4ysFLXKTjIIlGjjE+g= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=EexKZDao; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.208.169 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="EexKZDao" Received: by mail-lj1-f169.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2ebd95f136bso10801611fa.0 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:07:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1718284018; x=1718888818; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=H4qMOlVAmB1+8562nApjJnNhlZQHZLqU1OXBwVXRF78=; b=EexKZDaoWhVtfDhXuRGDf9jpLwRJrOnRDXSE15p0f4AvhKfOttfOEFPBV8FWwSWcV2 d1l5Ut2dN+CK31R+zG1BAWjnRsB7xSnECv2ZJJV400PECvzZ6AIcY9/eoZJ1Co6vRiKZ /iTL/b6yO5KYEYbVD+sg3ngzDhoRC1nWyYNGE9R89SFJY8rOtE1YsRp6UJbGVXv+5Dr1 Z5FHqr0HTXGhLfFVZSYCXNNocOJYxUgyU8EkNSIP3+zOZVIS1ozd74+kPXdj5ySIf0gY du8jTQ1KXvejNlrSmCL3q0hFOwSisqxA48sVLrTuf5C1+RAbrL710MX2M9zcyfADCwGG SFcA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1718284018; x=1718888818; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=H4qMOlVAmB1+8562nApjJnNhlZQHZLqU1OXBwVXRF78=; b=GYWbK1viViXRdAkF2K7Od4Bq8aDM442zk6mSjzS6SQ0+2SvxJHojx8qZEjiu0zrVnm eLT60VRprFFPsHnX/oWlYZgmWnE7czeAX8nKO6eZiu1MY7JhliC92H4O1N+WBB4bh1Ra XLzKqGa6r20Z07S3o4GrjsCb0R17BPa/ZdHXA5QLhpWCkiPbwyFsnWqTZKqBApMmQozt uV7OGcZmlAe8wjjsTDQRdhU3axXz3P60XLu2SINx+j/d11pHtgbo0XMjsCp3pWAdDIrT ex5QAN2spKfk0cw7Ll49/P9Bfk6bjatR9JCI8cyFk/xWwkNZ4mG/L4E4CC86BycfCbk1 Wmpw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXnsv0oJDs+dXRb00AQNTfqpKPyU9t9Tal43tfLNUcOAsrGGDa+Op0TwJb1Trhroi6OG+APgKz3c9I2GhCKzabVGs4yNl8l X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy7RvaTCqmDsICpKz8gBlIRPJQt3BEJxiaz0S8EoiyAGB6ZkBgC /lvdw9rbMO56aTRJvhr/SMHun4lQ1eLwSsQOQs1JcnWszxJdjgKc X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFNjIqLDbiiJvyVQ+CTYUUPuuKLx47d3/3uk6kw1RXtVGPymnVcCEA7pTqKhgYonTHLU10trQ== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:878f:0:b0:2eb:ecba:444a with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2ebfc9fac80mr27236611fa.23.1718284018170; Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:06:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pc636 (host-90-233-218-141.mobileonline.telia.com. [90.233.218.141]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 38308e7fff4ca-2ec05c05f56sm2099851fa.42.2024.06.13.06.06.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:06:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Uladzislau Rezki X-Google-Original-From: Uladzislau Rezki Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 15:06:54 +0200 To: "Paul E. McKenney" , Vlastimil Babka Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" , Jakub Kicinski , Julia Lawall , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux.dev, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mathieu Desnoyers , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "Naveen N. Rao" , Christophe Leroy , Nicholas Piggin , netdev@vger.kernel.org, wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, Neil Brown , Olga Kornievskaia , Dai Ngo , Tom Talpey , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, Lai Jiangshan , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org, Vlastimil Babka Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] replace call_rcu by kfree_rcu for simple kmem_cache_free callback Message-ID: References: <20240609082726.32742-1-Julia.Lawall@inria.fr> <20240612143305.451abf58@kernel.org> <80e03b02-7e24-4342-af0b-ba5117b19828@paulmck-laptop> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bridge@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <80e03b02-7e24-4342-af0b-ba5117b19828@paulmck-laptop> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 05:47:08AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > 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. > void kmem_cache_destroy(struct kmem_cache *s) { int err = -EBUSY; bool rcu_set; if (unlikely(!s) || !kasan_check_byte(s)) return; cpus_read_lock(); mutex_lock(&slab_mutex); rcu_set = s->flags & SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU; s->refcount--; if (s->refcount) goto out_unlock; err = shutdown_cache(s); WARN(err, "%s %s: Slab cache still has objects when called from %pS", __func__, s->name, (void *)_RET_IP_); ... cpus_read_unlock(); if (!err && !rcu_set) kmem_cache_release(s); } so we have SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU flag that defers freeing slab-pages and a cache by a grace period. Similar flag can be added, like SLAB_DESTROY_ONCE_FULLY_FREED, in this case a worker rearm itself if there are still objects which should be freed. Any thoughts here? -- Uladzislau Rezki