Re: [PATCH] ipc/sem: do not sleep with a spin lock held

[Vasily Averin <vvs@virtuozzo.com>]

On 22.12.2021 14:45, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi Minghao,
> 
> On 12/22/21 09:10, cgel.zte@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@zte.com.cn>
>>
>> We can't call kvfree() with a spin lock held, so defer it.

I'm sorry, but I do not understand why exactly we cannot use kvfree?
Could you explain it in more details?

>> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <zealci@zte.com.cn>
>> Signed-off-by: Minghao Chi <chi.minghao@zte.com.cn>
> 
> Could you add
> 
> Fixes: fc37a3b8b438 ("[PATCH] ipc sem: use kvmalloc for sem_undo allocation")
> 
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> 
> I will review/test the change in the next few days.
> 
> Especially, I would like to check if there are further instances where the same mistake was made.
> 
>> /**
>> * kvfree() - Free memory.
>> * @addr: Pointer to allocated memory.
>> *
>> * kvfree frees memory allocated by any of vmalloc(), kmalloc() or kvmalloc().
>> * It is slightly more efficient to use kfree() or vfree() if you are certain
>> * that you know which one to use.
>> *
>> * Context: Either preemptible task context or not-NMI interrupt.
>> */
>>
> As an independent change: Should we add a
> 
> 
>       might_sleep_if(!in_interrupt());
> 
> into kvfree(), to trigger bugs more easily?

I think it is good idea in general, 
however please do not use "in_interrupt()", it is obsoleted 
and in fact means "We're in NMI,IRQ,SoftIRQ context or have BH disabled"

Please use something like in_task()

Thank you,	Vasily Averin