From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Harry Yoo (Oracle)" <harry@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH slab/for-next v4 3/8] mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 13:01:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260720130134.C23A21F039EE@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260720-kfree_rcu_nolock-v4-3-964e03c41a4e@kernel.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Acquiring local_trylock in __kfree_rcu_sheaf() causes an invalid wait context lockdep warning when kvfree_call_rcu() is called under a raw spinlock.
--
--- Patch [3]: [PATCH slab/for-next v4 3/8] mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled ---
commit 48ff7cace4bd8ff5a54e0dc53dea46c9c152b1ad
Author: Harry Yoo (Oracle) <harry@kernel.org>
mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled
This patch optimizes the deferred call_rcu() path in __kfree_rcu_sheaf() by
checking if IRQs are disabled. If IRQs are enabled, it avoids falling back
to the deferred path since call_rcu() cannot be interrupted by itself in
this context.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CAADnVQKRVD5ZSnEKbZZU7w86gHbGHUug2pvzpgZTngNS+fg4rw@mail.gmail.com
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index 0c350274fbff4..680fe64aff72e 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -6136,8 +6136,12 @@ bool __kfree_rcu_sheaf(struct kmem_cache *s, void *obj, unsigned int free_flags)
> if (likely(rcu_sheaf->size < s->sheaf_capacity)) {
> rcu_sheaf = NULL;
> } else {
> - if (unlikely(!allow_spin)) {
> - /* call_rcu() cannot be called in an unknown context */
> + /*
> + * With !allow_spin, we might have interrupted call_rcu()'s
> + * IRQ-disabled critical section. If IRQs are not disabled,
> + * we know that's not the case.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(!allow_spin && irqs_disabled())) {
> rcu_sheaf->size--;
> local_unlock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock);
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does using local_unlock() here (and
local_trylock() earlier in __kfree_rcu_sheaf()) violate wait context rules?
The kvfree_call_rcu() path can be called with a raw spinlock held, such as
pi_lock.
Because local_trylock is treated as a sleeping lock under PREEMPT_RT
wait-type checking, acquiring it while holding a raw spinlock triggers a
lockdep "Invalid wait context" warning.
This happens because CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING statically checks
declared wait-types rather than runtime behavior.
Is there a way to defer this freeing without taking local_trylock?
> goto fail;
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260720-kfree_rcu_nolock-v4-0-964e03c41a4e@kernel.org?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-20 13:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-20 12:44 [PATCH slab/for-next v4 0/8] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() and improve slub_kunit coverage Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 1/8] mm/slab, slub_kunit: register kprobe to trigger _nolock APIs Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 12:56 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 2/8] mm/slab: handle the !allow_spin case in kfree_rcu_sheaf() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:11 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 3/8] mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:01 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 4/8] mm/slab: extend deferred free mechanism to handle rcu sheaves Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:03 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 5/8] mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 12:56 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 6/8] mm/slab: introduce struct kvfree_rcu_head for kvfree_rcu batching Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 7/8] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:07 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 8/8] slub_kunit: extend the test for kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
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=20260720130134.C23A21F039EE@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=harry@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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