Re: slub/debugobjects: lockup when freeing memory

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 04:42:11PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 06/19/2014 04:29 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > rcu: Provide call_rcu_alloc() and call_rcu_sched_alloc() to avoid recursion
> > 
> > The sl*b allocators use call_rcu() to manage object lifetimes, but
> > call_rcu() can use debug-objects, which in turn invokes the sl*b
> > allocators.  These allocators are not prepared for this sort of
> > recursion, which can result in failures.
> > 
> > This commit therefore creates call_rcu_alloc() and call_rcu_sched_alloc(),
> > which act as their call_rcu() and call_rcu_sched() counterparts, but
> > which avoid invoking debug-objects.  These new API members are intended
> > only for use by the sl*b allocators, and this commit makes the sl*b
> > allocators use call_rcu_alloc().  Why call_rcu_sched_alloc()?  Because
> > in CONFIG_PREEMPT=n kernels, call_rcu() maps to call_rcu_sched(), so
> > therefore call_rcu_alloc() must map to call_rcu_sched_alloc().
> > 
> > Reported-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
> > Set-straight-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> Paul, what is this patch based on? It won't apply cleanly on -next
> or Linus's tree.

On my -rcu tree, but I think that Thomas's approach is better.

							Thanx, Paul

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>