From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
To: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
bridge@lists.linux.dev, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>, Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@netapp.com>,
Dai Ngo <Dai.Ngo@oracle.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] replace call_rcu by kfree_rcu for simple kmem_cache_free callback
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 16:56:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZnBOkZClsvAUa_5X@zx2c4.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZnA_QFvuyABnD3ZA@pc636>
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 03:50:56PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 09:33:45PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 02:35:33PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > > + /* Should a destroy process be deferred? */
> > > + if (s->flags & SLAB_DEFER_DESTROY) {
> > > + list_move_tail(&s->list, &slab_caches_defer_destroy);
> > > + schedule_delayed_work(&slab_caches_defer_destroy_work, HZ);
> > > + goto out_unlock;
> > > + }
> >
> > Wouldn't it be smoother to have the actual kmem_cache_free() function
> > check to see if it's been marked for destruction and the refcount is
> > zero, rather than polling every one second? I mentioned this approach
> > in: https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zmo9-YGraiCj5-MI@zx2c4.com/ -
> >
> > I wonder if the right fix to this would be adding a `should_destroy`
> > boolean to kmem_cache, which kmem_cache_destroy() sets to true. And
> > then right after it checks `if (number_of_allocations == 0)
> > actually_destroy()`, and likewise on each kmem_cache_free(), it
> > could check `if (should_destroy && number_of_allocations == 0)
> > actually_destroy()`.
> >
> I do not find pooling as bad way we can go with. But your proposal
> sounds reasonable to me also. We can combine both "prototypes" to
> one and offer.
>
> Can you post a prototype here?
This is untested, but the simplest, shortest possible version would be:
diff --git a/mm/slab.h b/mm/slab.h
index 5f8f47c5bee0..907c0ea56c01 100644
--- a/mm/slab.h
+++ b/mm/slab.h
@@ -275,6 +275,7 @@ struct kmem_cache {
unsigned int inuse; /* Offset to metadata */
unsigned int align; /* Alignment */
unsigned int red_left_pad; /* Left redzone padding size */
+ bool is_destroyed; /* Destruction happens when no objects */
const char *name; /* Name (only for display!) */
struct list_head list; /* List of slab caches */
#ifdef CONFIG_SYSFS
diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
index 1560a1546bb1..f700bed066d9 100644
--- a/mm/slab_common.c
+++ b/mm/slab_common.c
@@ -494,8 +494,8 @@ void kmem_cache_destroy(struct kmem_cache *s)
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_);
+ if (err)
+ s->is_destroyed = true;
out_unlock:
mutex_unlock(&slab_mutex);
cpus_read_unlock();
diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
index 1373ac365a46..7db8fe90a323 100644
--- a/mm/slub.c
+++ b/mm/slub.c
@@ -4510,6 +4510,8 @@ void kmem_cache_free(struct kmem_cache *s, void *x)
return;
trace_kmem_cache_free(_RET_IP_, x, s);
slab_free(s, virt_to_slab(x), x, _RET_IP_);
+ if (s->is_destroyed)
+ kmem_cache_destroy(s);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(kmem_cache_free);
@@ -5342,9 +5344,6 @@ static void free_partial(struct kmem_cache *s, struct kmem_cache_node *n)
if (!slab->inuse) {
remove_partial(n, slab);
list_add(&slab->slab_list, &discard);
- } else {
- list_slab_objects(s, slab,
- "Objects remaining in %s on __kmem_cache_shutdown()");
}
}
spin_unlock_irq(&n->list_lock);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-17 14:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-09 8:27 [PATCH 00/14] replace call_rcu by kfree_rcu for simple kmem_cache_free callback Julia Lawall
2024-06-09 8:27 ` [PATCH 03/14] KVM: PPC: " Julia Lawall
2024-06-12 21:33 ` [PATCH 00/14] " Jakub Kicinski
2024-06-12 22:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-12 22:46 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-06-12 22:52 ` Jens Axboe
2024-06-12 23:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-12 23:31 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 0:31 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 3:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 12:22 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 12:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 14:11 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 15:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-17 15:10 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-17 16:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-17 17:23 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-17 18:42 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 21:08 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-18 9:31 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-18 16:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-18 17:21 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-18 17:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-19 9:28 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-19 16:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-21 9:32 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-07-15 20:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-24 13:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-07-24 14:40 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-08 16:41 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-08 20:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-10-09 17:08 ` Julia Lawall
2024-10-09 21:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-19 9:51 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-19 9:56 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-19 11:22 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 18:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-17 21:34 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-13 14:17 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-06-13 14:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 11:58 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-13 12:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 13:06 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-13 15:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 17:38 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-13 17:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-13 17:58 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-13 18:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-14 12:35 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-14 14:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2024-06-14 14:50 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-14 19:33 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-17 13:50 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 14:56 ` Jason A. Donenfeld [this message]
2024-06-17 16:30 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 16:33 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-17 16:38 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-17 17:04 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-17 21:19 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-06-17 16:42 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 16:57 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2024-06-17 17:19 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2024-06-17 14:37 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-10-08 16:36 ` Vlastimil Babka
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=ZnBOkZClsvAUa_5X@zx2c4.com \
--to=jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=Dai.Ngo@oracle.com \
--cc=Julia.Lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=bridge@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
--cc=ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kolga@netapp.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=tom@talpey.com \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.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