The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-29  8:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ 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

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