Re: [PATCH bpf v2] bpf/helpers: Use __GFP_HIGH instead of GFP_ATOMIC in __bpf_async_init()

[patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org]

Hello:

This patch was applied to bpf/bpf.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>:

On Tue,  9 Sep 2025 09:52:20 +0000 you wrote:
> Currently, calling bpf_map_kmalloc_node() from __bpf_async_init() can
> cause various locking issues; see the following stack trace (edited for
> style) as one example:
> 
> ...
>  [10.011566]  do_raw_spin_lock.cold
>  [10.011570]  try_to_wake_up             (5) double-acquiring the same
>  [10.011575]  kick_pool                      rq_lock, causing a hardlockup
>  [10.011579]  __queue_work
>  [10.011582]  queue_work_on
>  [10.011585]  kernfs_notify
>  [10.011589]  cgroup_file_notify
>  [10.011593]  try_charge_memcg           (4) memcg accounting raises an
>  [10.011597]  obj_cgroup_charge_pages        MEMCG_MAX event
>  [10.011599]  obj_cgroup_charge_account
>  [10.011600]  __memcg_slab_post_alloc_hook
>  [10.011603]  __kmalloc_node_noprof
> ...
>  [10.011611]  bpf_map_kmalloc_node
>  [10.011612]  __bpf_async_init
>  [10.011615]  bpf_timer_init             (3) BPF calls bpf_timer_init()
>  [10.011617]  bpf_prog_xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx_fcg_runnable
>  [10.011619]  bpf__sched_ext_ops_runnable
>  [10.011620]  enqueue_task_scx           (2) BPF runs with rq_lock held
>  [10.011622]  enqueue_task
>  [10.011626]  ttwu_do_activate
>  [10.011629]  sched_ttwu_pending         (1) grabs rq_lock
> ...
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [bpf,v2] bpf/helpers: Use __GFP_HIGH instead of GFP_ATOMIC in __bpf_async_init()
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf/c/6d78b4473cdb

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html