From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D055FC27C4F for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2024 17:39:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20230601 header.b=ReeiM6BV; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4W0V6N5HYFz3dLS for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2024 03:39:56 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20230601 header.b=ReeiM6BV; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::12d; helo=mail-lf1-x12d.google.com; envelope-from=urezki@gmail.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from mail-lf1-x12d.google.com (mail-lf1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4W0V5Y1tH3z3cjX for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2024 03:39:12 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-lf1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52bbdb15dd5so1658347e87.3 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2024 10:39:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1718300344; x=1718905144; darn=lists.ozlabs.org; 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=956BT+Uq9SD+emo8+jCK8z5I39sZ4FeCbRyFqSAHxWc=; b=ReeiM6BVSgwRFyExGAS9bvLJMrarmtl4zwQauT2zQoUuwod0JB9SwPGxVr8kB+G6/Q Z3WQ1vCQmJ7pV47K2bq1dRfFb812yfRieKhv9YLm/FLEct5arXGFYYp/OKl+y1gpUK8N WEBnxlb0ZUOPiGr7563uCiJ1SWQTEi2lDrAk48STI9AuJjkoPjiod8wB8bqHs1sOFWN7 +MINIaA+Mt0dt3m3/5eKYovexdUBXaTYSEJBI2Jw1ngSf+nXyGp4zpj7V9C4E4T5SoI6 YU2csgQS3sOBvqCHojkwxvjkSOUMwxZrA2AHWRP/CFGnArCoKbdtak4f8qQS2q3Hd2JD WD+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1718300344; x=1718905144; 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=956BT+Uq9SD+emo8+jCK8z5I39sZ4FeCbRyFqSAHxWc=; b=hhZRk/d48O8xwB9GkEe4D1GaqXJa/uqif6736zTOVPQAKGDOOG8IY7YdR2G9RQC0lU ZKrxALq0+ONqPUBVyZmTxHUzYot8VGGFDOcELN2k8MlpcBYJZVD6xVzdybNEFJjfZlJY +hvzeLIJjGfnJ4bV5Xtvt53zkgYUygojOwX0Wta4jm7npn1V1b/MAcvyv8efnWkk9mCg yBBr15qJeu5OTRMczVrO2yb1PXsx5l8GGsoteUZUKo+d/Q2bE1Yk0anLg3YCvgC4cDNL RUywMekIEtkHzApnPlhShkSV30w/wQ9r1osgshsn54kbTxPdfgqrb1pco7x+5NBNWTQw 4hpw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWRhfMgLbSgeOh8eydDvdJC230mD+5r9KWD4v0C91w8bI6TE+GBSP+l6jbLKByuZTBAvPoPHLeetyB1pLcq/2WXII0tvt6On2a5EOt7wg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywwiz9Lmr60EKvtHQN+7aKgp4JCpPJEGICQArhxg7d3evRTWyTd 7G8m1OMZytBw4BI1hH/Eg/IdmPtr0tiIAGxrsmG9wnFPKowlB/pn X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEqfg03O6T4CVRhNhuT1kToVJHsIj8GcfpqCCRbVlEQmwf5k9Sqz/b5zlxpaNyn2BuI8Okyaw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:517:b0:52b:796e:66a5 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52ca6e9954cmr243776e87.66.1718300343767; Thu, 13 Jun 2024 10:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pc636 (host-90-233-218-141.mobileonline.telia.com. [90.233.218.141]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 2adb3069b0e04-52ca288cd87sm299099e87.304.2024.06.13.10.39.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 13 Jun 2024 10:39:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Uladzislau Rezki X-Google-Original-From: Uladzislau Rezki Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 19:38:59 +0200 To: "Paul E. McKenney" 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> <7efde25f-6af5-4a67-abea-b26732a8aca1@paulmck-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7efde25f-6af5-4a67-abea-b26732a8aca1@paulmck-laptop> X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Neil Brown , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Olga Kornievskaia , Dai Ngo , Christophe Leroy , coreteam@netfilter.org, "Naveen N. Rao" , Jakub Kicinski , linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux.dev, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, Nicholas Piggin , linux-can@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Mathieu Desnoyers , Vlastimil Babka , Tom Talpey , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Lai Jiangshan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall , Uladzislau Rezki , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 08:06:30AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 03:06:54PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > 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? > > Wouldn't we also need some additional code to later check for all objects > being freed to the slab, whether or not that code is initiated from > kmem_cache_destroy()? > Same away as SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU is handled from the kmem_cache_destroy() function. It checks that flag and if it is true and extra worker is scheduled to perform a deferred(instead of right away) destroy after rcu_barrier() finishes. -- Uladzislau Rezki