From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
oleg@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, mhiramat@kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
jolsa@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org,
surenb@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, mjguzik@gmail.com, jannh@google.com,
mhocko@kernel.org, vbabka@suse.cz, mingo@kernel.org,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 tip/perf/core 3/5] fs: add back RCU-delayed freeing of FMODE_BACKING file
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 12:58:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzY5fy1VVykbSdcLbVhaHRuT6pRNYNgpYteaD79vRM7N5A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241004-holzweg-wahrgemacht-c1429b882127@brauner>
On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 1:01 AM Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 11:13:54AM GMT, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 01, 2024 at 03:52:05PM GMT, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > 6cf41fcfe099 ("backing file: free directly") switched FMODE_BACKING
> > > files to direct freeing as back then there were no use cases requiring
> > > RCU protected access to such files.
> > >
> > > Now, with speculative lockless VMA-to-uprobe lookup logic, we do need to
> > > have a guarantee that struct file memory is not going to be freed from
> > > under us during speculative check. So add back RCU-delayed freeing
> > > logic.
> > >
> > > We use headless kfree_rcu_mightsleep() variant, as file_free() is only
> > > called for FMODE_BACKING files in might_sleep() context.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> > > Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
> > > Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
>
> Fwiw, I have another patch series for files that I'm testing that will
> require me to switch FMODE_BACKING to a SLAB_TYPSAFE_BY_RCU cache. That
> shouldn't matter for your use-case though.
Correct, we assume SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU semantics for the common case
anyways. But hopefully my change won't cause major merge conflicts
with your patch set.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-04 19:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-01 22:52 [PATCH v2 tip/perf/core 0/5] uprobes,mm: speculative lockless VMA-to-uprobe lookup Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-01 22:52 ` [PATCH v2 tip/perf/core 1/5] mm: introduce mmap_lock_speculation_{start|end} Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-07 17:05 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-01 22:52 ` [PATCH v2 tip/perf/core 2/5] mm: switch to 64-bit mm_lock_seq/vm_lock_seq on 64-bit architectures Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-01 22:52 ` [PATCH v2 tip/perf/core 3/5] fs: add back RCU-delayed freeing of FMODE_BACKING file Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-03 9:13 ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-04 8:01 ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-04 19:58 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2024-10-09 10:35 ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-09 19:37 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-01 22:52 ` [PATCH v2 tip/perf/core 4/5] uprobes: simplify find_active_uprobe_rcu() VMA checks Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-02 6:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-10-01 22:52 ` [PATCH v2 tip/perf/core 5/5] uprobes: add speculative lockless VMA-to-inode-to-uprobe resolution Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-02 7:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-10-02 20:02 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-10-03 9:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2024-10-04 23:59 ` kernel test robot
2024-10-05 1:12 ` kernel test robot
2024-10-08 15:20 ` [PATCH v2 tip/perf/core 0/5] uprobes,mm: speculative lockless VMA-to-uprobe lookup Oleg Nesterov
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=CAEf4BzY5fy1VVykbSdcLbVhaHRuT6pRNYNgpYteaD79vRM7N5A@mail.gmail.com \
--to=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.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