From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Harry Yoo (Oracle)" <harry@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev,
bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/8] mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 08:47:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260729084707.D129D1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260729-kfree_rcu_nolock-v5-3-a28cdcda9673@kernel.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] The modified fallback condition `!allow_spin && irqs_disabled()` is completely dead code because `allow_spin` evaluates to true unconditionally, rendering the intended NMI protection for `call_rcu()` ineffective.
--
--- Patch [3]: [PATCH v5 3/8] mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled ---
commit f7ce8e162ca9c0e62e67afe017d8855bcf7b7674
Author: Harry Yoo (Oracle) <harry@kernel.org>
mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled
This commit updates the fallback condition in __kfree_rcu_sheaf() to check
if IRQs are disabled, allowing direct use of call_rcu() when IRQs are
enabled. It assumes that if IRQs are enabled, re-entrance into call_rcu()
cannot occur.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CAADnVQKRVD5ZSnEKbZZU7w86gHbGHUug2pvzpgZTngNS+fg4rw@mail.gmail.com
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index 2c5ba8c326e73..bb0f2975c95b1 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -6157,8 +6157,12 @@ 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())) {
[Severity: High]
Does this make the fallback condition completely dead code?
Since __kfree_rcu_sheaf() is only invoked by kfree_rcu_sheaf() in
mm/slab_common.c with the SLAB_FREE_DEFAULT (0) flag:
mm/slab_common.c:kfree_rcu_sheaf() {
...
return __kfree_rcu_sheaf(s, obj, SLAB_FREE_DEFAULT);
}
The allow_spin variable will evaluate to true unconditionally. This makes
!allow_spin always false, which prevents this fallback path from executing.
If an eBPF tracing program calls kfree_rcu() from an NMI context exactly when
the CPU's RCU sheaf becomes full, could the code now invoke call_rcu() and
corrupt RCU per-CPU data structures?
> rcu_sheaf->size--;
> local_unlock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock);
> goto fail;
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260729-kfree_rcu_nolock-v5-0-a28cdcda9673@kernel.org?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-29 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-29 8:20 [PATCH v5 0/8] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() and improve slub_kunit coverage Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-29 8:20 ` [PATCH v5 1/8] mm/slab, slub_kunit: register kprobe to trigger _nolock APIs Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-29 8:35 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 8:20 ` [PATCH v5 2/8] mm/slab: handle the !allow_spin case in kfree_rcu_sheaf() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-29 8:44 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 8:20 ` [PATCH v5 3/8] mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-29 8:47 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-29 8:20 ` [PATCH v5 4/8] mm/slab: extend deferred free mechanism to handle rcu sheaves Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-29 8:20 ` [PATCH v5 5/8] mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-29 8:43 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 8:20 ` [PATCH v5 6/8] mm/slab: introduce struct kvfree_rcu_head for kvfree_rcu batching Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-29 8:40 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 8:20 ` [PATCH v5 7/8] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-29 8:41 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 8:20 ` [PATCH v5 8/8] slub_kunit: extend the test for kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-29 8:39 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 14:14 ` [PATCH v5 0/8] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() and improve slub_kunit coverage Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
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=20260729084707.D129D1F000E9@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