From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] making vfree() safe from interrupt contexts
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 19:32:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130303193223.GN4503@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130303184736.GM4503@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 06:47:36PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> To bring back the thing discussed back in, IIRC, December: we have
> a bunch of places where inability to do vfree() from interrupt contexts
> (the most common case is doing that from RCU callback) leads to very
> ugly open-coded schemes that delay it one way or another. We can let vfree()
> itself do that instead. AFAICS, it works; the diff below covers several
> obvious cases found just by grep. I'm fairly sure that there's more code
> that could benefit from that...
>
> I'm not sure which tree should it go through, though. Suggestions?
> The reason I'm interested in this sucker is the mess in fs/file.c (fdtable
> freeing), but the main change here is in mm/vmalloc.c...
>
> Note that the patch obviously ought to be split - mm/vmalloc.c
> part, allowing vfree() in interrupt contexts (current mainline has
> BUG_ON() triggered in that case) and a chunk for each ad-hoc vfree()
> deferral scheme killed.
>
> Comments?
BTW, looking a bit more shows another place that might benefit from that -
kernel/events/ring_buffer.c:rb_free_work() is called via schedule_work()
and I don't see anything in it besides vfree() that would demand that
kind of treatment.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-03 19:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-03 18:47 [RFC][PATCH] making vfree() safe from interrupt contexts Al Viro
2013-03-03 19:32 ` Al Viro [this message]
2013-03-03 22:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-03-03 22:51 ` Al Viro
2013-03-03 23:01 ` Linus Torvalds
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=20130303193223.GN4503@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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