From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B87E3367F2F; Thu, 30 Jul 2026 03:08:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785380933; cv=none; b=Z6qiImiM3/IxMNlA5FDoWcndwN0G8v27joahHyIwa3YTlSaED2ZkQchi7QTiE+zOG2eB3VvdS+6dZKLeTpx9aPQ4D2mD1S+sWG5/wzHYPjnkTQe1tZXKXqdSv2pAYMOTdnYSR9CX1GPU0tYhTM0BySKvuNrzU+XqpqNeE0SLbhA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785380933; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RXUJcPQ0nd7RDchKXPgt+jkCnXJ1MtGPAWTqSFTEyXE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=BdV2d1aXzewQ2hiiaO7JvVIK9y0WFx0UwzZ7tcMVMuHuacUKMojpw2+Z1HEww1vpf3+F886C7Lh5ubx0i5NweAcfpRXkyB9cbWb0gd8vR7pMwCQcMAkoN6SqUIL9x2vCjUVY4sXPsFFKCdLBYTrGdZl8m4IDnoaimzRKAjHlV3Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Fkb51iDq; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Fkb51iDq" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30B9F1F000E9; Thu, 30 Jul 2026 03:08:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1785380931; bh=JFYplbxEhQ00hEvZ5hng6YDKKuCP2Lh5XB9nlXgKZ7o=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=Fkb51iDqkqLHhVoJ5kwF3219gubEw0+gbN9PTrmEy6rMkapWH7oDh37pFO+af77/p kahJV9sx2eIC5HeZEEK5a4hik06jV5Zj94qDu1RFbxTuppTEsUCTMQco42MDHgMdnn 4B5D1ck16rJRGRY8IfDwuJwucgu6QHd0hpvL1J3gEXQ1MmVC7ufOXWqkqyu1ph7nZ8 tjhCBvGb8Ow0Zy8k5pqlD5tmdBpqIjJZX4uOT8jHL61KSaS3rYAcz1sDDv1N14ff0T 85D3zm7H5b/fEVJBzh3I8jE7+3KKEuFiUGgOScu24FS2KR4fTV0BwKMeqOlHT0qAM7 tD7nZxZ/SveFA== Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 12:08:44 +0900 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: rcu@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/8] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() and improve slub_kunit coverage To: "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" , Andrew Morton , Hao Li , Christoph Lameter , David Rientjes , Roman Gushchin , Alexei Starovoitov , Andrii Nakryiko , Puranjay Mohan , Amery Hung , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Clark Williams , Steven Rostedt , "Paul E. McKenney" , Frederic Weisbecker , Neeraj Upadhyay , Joel Fernandes , Josh Triplett , Boqun Feng , Uladzislau Rezki , Mathieu Desnoyers , Lai Jiangshan , Zqiang , Pedro Falcato , Suren Baghdasaryan , Shengming Hu Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, rcu@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org References: <20260729-kfree_rcu_nolock-v5-0-a28cdcda9673@kernel.org> <5342124c-4847-4e93-92a4-f3512928c4d1@kernel.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Harry Yoo In-Reply-To: <5342124c-4847-4e93-92a4-f3512928c4d1@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 7/29/26 11:14 PM, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote: > On 7/29/26 10:20, Harry Yoo (Oracle) wrote: > > ... > >> 8: 8e69c83a1e52 ! 8: aeaf2ab60046 slub_kunit: extend the test for kfree_rcu_nolock() >> @@ lib/tests/slub_kunit.c: struct test_nolock_context { >> - gfp_t gfp = (i % 2) ? GFP_KERNEL : GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT; >> + gfp_t gfp = (i & 1) ? GFP_KERNEL : GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT; >> >> - objects[j] = kmalloc_obj(*objects[j], gfp); >> +- objects[j] = kmalloc(64, gfp); >> ++ objects[j] = kmalloc_obj(*objects[j], gfp); >> if (!objects[j]) { >> + j--; >> + while (j >= 0) >> @@ lib/tests/slub_kunit.c: static void test_kmalloc_kfree(void) >> } >> } >> >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260427-nolock-api-fix-v2-0-a6b83a92d9a4@kernel.org [1] >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/6edebc2b-5f5a-4b9c-9a4c-564310acee1b@kernel.org [2] >> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) >> Signed-off-by: Harry Yoo (Oracle) >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/872bd673-3d45-4111-8a41-31185db3ece5@kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Harry Yoo (Oracle) >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/6811cc17-8ee4-48c8-8cbf-6bf4d9f98162@kernel.org [1] >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/40591888-3a87-433e-b3d2-cda1cab543be@kernel.org [2] >> Suggested-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) >> Signed-off-by: Harry Yoo (Oracle) >> Signed-off-by: Harry Yoo (Oracle) >> Signed-off-by: Harry Yoo (Oracle) > > Wonder what produced this weird block of assorted trailers? "b4 prep > --compare-to vX" never did that for me? Interesting. I checked it again with `b4 prep --compare-to v4`, but the command didn't produce this. Looking at the cover letter `b4 prep --edit-cover` It's not even there. Probably it was produced during b4 send --no-sign? hmm... >> --- >> Harry Yoo (Oracle) (8): >> mm/slab, slub_kunit: register kprobe to trigger _nolock APIs >> mm/slab: handle the !allow_spin case in kfree_rcu_sheaf() >> mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled >> mm/slab: extend deferred free mechanism to handle rcu sheaves >> mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT >> mm/slab: introduce struct kvfree_rcu_head for kvfree_rcu batching >> mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() >> slub_kunit: extend the test for kfree_rcu_nolock() >> >> include/linux/rcupdate.h | 32 ++++++- >> include/linux/slab.h | 16 +--- >> include/linux/types.h | 8 ++ >> include/trace/events/rcu.h | 2 +- >> lib/tests/slub_kunit.c | 190 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >> mm/slab.h | 52 ++++++++++- >> mm/slab_common.c | 81 +++++++++++++---- >> mm/slub.c | 220 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- >> 8 files changed, 433 insertions(+), 168 deletions(-) > > Applied to slab/for-7.3/kfree_rcu_nolock and merged go slab/for-next, thanks! Thanks a lot! > Used slab/for-next-fixes as a base for a better topic branch indepdencence. Ah, I see. thanks. So slab/for-next is not a good base unless it depends too much on existing commits on the branch? And usually it's better to use the base (slab/for-next-fixes, in this case) of slab/for-next as a base? >> --- >> base-commit: ffc64805cebac330b2a60b2f1f144fcc35b8ab46 >> change-id: 20260615-kfree_rcu_nolock-e5502555992f >> >> Best regards, -- Cheers, Harry / Hyeonggon