From: Alexey Nepomnyashih <sdl@nppct.ru>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Alexey Nepomnyashih <sdl@nppct.ru>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
lvc-project@linuxtesting.org, Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH 6.1 03/16] bpf: Rename few bpf_mem_alloc fields.
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2025 07:46:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250202074709.932174-4-sdl@nppct.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250202074709.932174-1-sdl@nppct.ru>
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
commit 12c8d0f4c8702f88a74973fb7ced85b59043b0ab upstream.
Rename:
- struct rcu_head rcu;
- struct llist_head free_by_rcu;
- struct llist_head waiting_for_gp;
- atomic_t call_rcu_in_progress;
+ struct llist_head free_by_rcu_ttrace;
+ struct llist_head waiting_for_gp_ttrace;
+ struct rcu_head rcu_ttrace;
+ atomic_t call_rcu_ttrace_in_progress;
...
- static void do_call_rcu(struct bpf_mem_cache *c)
+ static void do_call_rcu_ttrace(struct bpf_mem_cache *c)
to better indicate intended use.
The 'tasks trace' is shortened to 'ttrace' to reduce verbosity.
No functional changes.
Later patches will add free_by_rcu/waiting_for_gp fields to be used with normal RCU.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230706033447.54696-2-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexey Nepomnyashih <sdl@nppct.ru>
---
kernel/bpf/memalloc.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/memalloc.c b/kernel/bpf/memalloc.c
index b9bdc9d81b9c..63b787128de8 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/memalloc.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/memalloc.c
@@ -99,10 +99,11 @@ struct bpf_mem_cache {
int low_watermark, high_watermark, batch;
int percpu_size;
- struct rcu_head rcu;
- struct llist_head free_by_rcu;
- struct llist_head waiting_for_gp;
- atomic_t call_rcu_in_progress;
+ /* list of objects to be freed after RCU tasks trace GP */
+ struct llist_head free_by_rcu_ttrace;
+ struct llist_head waiting_for_gp_ttrace;
+ struct rcu_head rcu_ttrace;
+ atomic_t call_rcu_ttrace_in_progress;
};
struct bpf_mem_caches {
@@ -165,18 +166,18 @@ static void alloc_bulk(struct bpf_mem_cache *c, int cnt, int node)
old_memcg = set_active_memcg(memcg);
for (i = 0; i < cnt; i++) {
/*
- * free_by_rcu is only manipulated by irq work refill_work().
+ * free_by_rcu_ttrace is only manipulated by irq work refill_work().
* IRQ works on the same CPU are called sequentially, so it is
* safe to use __llist_del_first() here. If alloc_bulk() is
* invoked by the initial prefill, there will be no running
* refill_work(), so __llist_del_first() is fine as well.
*
- * In most cases, objects on free_by_rcu are from the same CPU.
+ * In most cases, objects on free_by_rcu_ttrace are from the same CPU.
* If some objects come from other CPUs, it doesn't incur any
* harm because NUMA_NO_NODE means the preference for current
* numa node and it is not a guarantee.
*/
- obj = __llist_del_first(&c->free_by_rcu);
+ obj = __llist_del_first(&c->free_by_rcu_ttrace);
if (!obj) {
/* Allocate, but don't deplete atomic reserves that typical
* GFP_ATOMIC would do. irq_work runs on this cpu and kmalloc
@@ -232,10 +233,10 @@ static void free_all(struct llist_node *llnode, bool percpu)
static void __free_rcu(struct rcu_head *head)
{
- struct bpf_mem_cache *c = container_of(head, struct bpf_mem_cache, rcu);
+ struct bpf_mem_cache *c = container_of(head, struct bpf_mem_cache, rcu_ttrace);
- free_all(llist_del_all(&c->waiting_for_gp), !!c->percpu_size);
- atomic_set(&c->call_rcu_in_progress, 0);
+ free_all(llist_del_all(&c->waiting_for_gp_ttrace), !!c->percpu_size);
+ atomic_set(&c->call_rcu_ttrace_in_progress, 0);
}
static void __free_rcu_tasks_trace(struct rcu_head *head)
@@ -250,31 +251,31 @@ static void enque_to_free(struct bpf_mem_cache *c, void *obj)
struct llist_node *llnode = obj;
/* bpf_mem_cache is a per-cpu object. Freeing happens in irq_work.
- * Nothing races to add to free_by_rcu list.
+ * Nothing races to add to free_by_rcu_ttrace list.
*/
- __llist_add(llnode, &c->free_by_rcu);
+ __llist_add(llnode, &c->free_by_rcu_ttrace);
}
-static void do_call_rcu(struct bpf_mem_cache *c)
+static void do_call_rcu_ttrace(struct bpf_mem_cache *c)
{
struct llist_node *llnode, *t;
- if (atomic_xchg(&c->call_rcu_in_progress, 1))
+ if (atomic_xchg(&c->call_rcu_ttrace_in_progress, 1))
return;
- WARN_ON_ONCE(!llist_empty(&c->waiting_for_gp));
- llist_for_each_safe(llnode, t, __llist_del_all(&c->free_by_rcu))
- /* There is no concurrent __llist_add(waiting_for_gp) access.
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(!llist_empty(&c->waiting_for_gp_ttrace));
+ llist_for_each_safe(llnode, t, __llist_del_all(&c->free_by_rcu_ttrace))
+ /* There is no concurrent __llist_add(waiting_for_gp_ttrace) access.
* It doesn't race with llist_del_all either.
- * But there could be two concurrent llist_del_all(waiting_for_gp):
+ * But there could be two concurrent llist_del_all(waiting_for_gp_ttrace):
* from __free_rcu() and from drain_mem_cache().
*/
- __llist_add(llnode, &c->waiting_for_gp);
+ __llist_add(llnode, &c->waiting_for_gp_ttrace);
/* Use call_rcu_tasks_trace() to wait for sleepable progs to finish.
* Then use call_rcu() to wait for normal progs to finish
* and finally do free_one() on each element.
*/
- call_rcu_tasks_trace(&c->rcu, __free_rcu_tasks_trace);
+ call_rcu_tasks_trace(&c->rcu_ttrace, __free_rcu_tasks_trace);
}
static void free_bulk(struct bpf_mem_cache *c)
@@ -302,7 +303,7 @@ static void free_bulk(struct bpf_mem_cache *c)
/* and drain free_llist_extra */
llist_for_each_safe(llnode, t, llist_del_all(&c->free_llist_extra))
enque_to_free(c, llnode);
- do_call_rcu(c);
+ do_call_rcu_ttrace(c);
}
static void bpf_mem_refill(struct irq_work *work)
@@ -435,13 +436,13 @@ static void drain_mem_cache(struct bpf_mem_cache *c)
/* No progs are using this bpf_mem_cache, but htab_map_free() called
* bpf_mem_cache_free() for all remaining elements and they can be in
- * free_by_rcu or in waiting_for_gp lists, so drain those lists now.
+ * free_by_rcu_ttrace or in waiting_for_gp_ttrace lists, so drain those lists now.
*
- * Except for waiting_for_gp list, there are no concurrent operations
+ * Except for waiting_for_gp_ttrace list, there are no concurrent operations
* on these lists, so it is safe to use __llist_del_all().
*/
- free_all(__llist_del_all(&c->free_by_rcu), percpu);
- free_all(llist_del_all(&c->waiting_for_gp), percpu);
+ free_all(__llist_del_all(&c->free_by_rcu_ttrace), percpu);
+ free_all(llist_del_all(&c->waiting_for_gp_ttrace), percpu);
free_all(__llist_del_all(&c->free_llist), percpu);
free_all(__llist_del_all(&c->free_llist_extra), percpu);
}
@@ -456,7 +457,7 @@ static void free_mem_alloc_no_barrier(struct bpf_mem_alloc *ma)
static void free_mem_alloc(struct bpf_mem_alloc *ma)
{
- /* waiting_for_gp lists was drained, but __free_rcu might
+ /* waiting_for_gp_ttrace lists was drained, but __free_rcu might
* still execute. Wait for it now before we freeing percpu caches.
*/
rcu_barrier_tasks_trace();
@@ -521,7 +522,7 @@ void bpf_mem_alloc_destroy(struct bpf_mem_alloc *ma)
*/
irq_work_sync(&c->refill_work);
drain_mem_cache(c);
- rcu_in_progress += atomic_read(&c->call_rcu_in_progress);
+ rcu_in_progress += atomic_read(&c->call_rcu_ttrace_in_progress);
}
/* objcg is the same across cpus */
if (c->objcg)
@@ -536,7 +537,7 @@ void bpf_mem_alloc_destroy(struct bpf_mem_alloc *ma)
c = &cc->cache[i];
irq_work_sync(&c->refill_work);
drain_mem_cache(c);
- rcu_in_progress += atomic_read(&c->call_rcu_in_progress);
+ rcu_in_progress += atomic_read(&c->call_rcu_ttrace_in_progress);
}
}
if (c->objcg)
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-02 7:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-02 7:46 [PATCH 6.1 00/16] Fixes bpf and rcu Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 01/16] bpf: Add a few bpf mem allocator functions Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 02/16] bpf: Factor out a common helper free_all() Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` Alexey Nepomnyashih [this message]
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 04/16] bpf: Let free_all() return the number of freed elements Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 05/16] bpf: Refactor alloc_bulk() Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 06/16] bpf: Factor out inc/dec of active flag into helpers Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 07/16] bpf: Use rcu_trace_implies_rcu_gp() in bpf memory allocator Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 08/16] bpf: Further refactor alloc_bulk() Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 09/16] bpf: Change bpf_mem_cache draining process Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 10/16] bpf: Add a hint to allocated objects Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 11/16] bpf: Introduce bpf_mem_free_rcu() similar to kfree_rcu() Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 12/16] rcu: Fix missing nocb gp wake on rcu_barrier() Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 13/16] rcu: Make call_rcu() lazy to save power Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 14/16] rcu: Export rcu_request_urgent_qs_task() Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 15/16] bpf: Remove unnecessary check when updating LPM trie Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 7:46 ` [PATCH 6.1 16/16] bpf: Switch to bpf mem allocator for " Alexey Nepomnyashih
2025-02-02 9:52 ` [PATCH 6.1 00/16] Fixes bpf and rcu Alexei Starovoitov
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=20250202074709.932174-4-sdl@nppct.ru \
--to=sdl@nppct.ru \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=houtao1@huawei.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lvc-project@linuxtesting.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=quic_neeraju@quicinc.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yhs@fb.com \
/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