From: "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" <vbabka@kernel.org>
To: "Harry Yoo (Oracle)" <harry@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Hao Li <hao.li@linux.dev>, Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>,
Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@nvidia.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang@linux.dev>, Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@suse.de>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Shengming Hu <hu.shengming@zte.com.cn>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH slab/for-next v4 5/8] mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2026 12:46:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <12c63386-f96e-421e-b34c-00548d016f69@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260720-kfree_rcu_nolock-v4-5-964e03c41a4e@kernel.org>
On 7/20/26 14:44, Harry Yoo (Oracle) wrote:
> As suggested by Vlastimil Babka [1], kfree_rcu_sheaf() can be used
> on PREEMPT_RT if we always assume spinning is not allowed on PREEMPT_RT.
> This is because local_trylock and spinlock_t are safe to use with
> trylock and unlock as long as the kernel does not spin and the context
> is not NMI and not hardirq.
>
> Now that __kfree_rcu_sheaf() knows how to handle SLAB_FREE_NOLOCK,
> relax the limitation and try the sheaves path on PREEMPT_RT as well.
>
> Keep the lockdep map on non RT kernels. However, do not use the lockdep
> map on PREEMPT_RT to avoid suppressing valid lockdep warnings.
>
> As pointed by Vlastimil Babka [2], on PREEMPT_RT it is unnecessary to
> defer call_rcu() under IRQ-disabled section or raw spinlock. However,
> let us avoid adding more complexity as the scenario is not supposed
> to be common on PREEMPT_RT, with a hope that call_rcu_nolock() will be
> soon supported in RCU.
>
> 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) <vbabka@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Harry Yoo (Oracle) <harry@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) <vbabka@kernel.org>
Nit:
> ---
> mm/slab_common.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> mm/slub.c | 17 ++++++++++-------
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
> index 9c9ae1384f47..8c631bf97cd5 100644
> --- a/mm/slab_common.c
> +++ b/mm/slab_common.c
> @@ -1595,6 +1595,14 @@ static bool kfree_rcu_sheaf(void *obj)
> {
> struct kmem_cache *s;
> struct slab *slab;
> + unsigned int free_flags = SLAB_FREE_DEFAULT;
> +
> + /*
> + * It is not safe to spin on PREEMPT_RT because the kernel might be
> + * holding a raw spinlock and slab acquires sleeping locks.
> + */
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))
> + free_flags = SLAB_FREE_NOLOCK;
>
> if (is_vmalloc_addr(obj))
> return false;
> @@ -1605,7 +1613,7 @@ static bool kfree_rcu_sheaf(void *obj)
>
> s = slab->slab_cache;
> if (likely(!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NUMA) || slab_nid(slab) == numa_mem_id()))
> - return __kfree_rcu_sheaf(s, obj, SLAB_FREE_DEFAULT);
> + return __kfree_rcu_sheaf(s, obj, free_flags);
>
> return false;
> }
> @@ -1954,7 +1962,7 @@ void kvfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, void *ptr)
> if (!head)
> might_sleep();
>
> - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && kfree_rcu_sheaf(ptr))
> + if (kfree_rcu_sheaf(ptr))
> return;
>
> // Queue the object but don't yet schedule the batch.
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index 8afa6b47b1f2..deac315d0f23 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -6065,12 +6065,13 @@ static void rcu_free_sheaf(struct rcu_head *head)
> * kvfree_call_rcu() can be called while holding a raw_spinlock_t. Since
> * __kfree_rcu_sheaf() may acquire a spinlock_t (sleeping lock on PREEMPT_RT),
> * this would violate lock nesting rules. Therefore, kvfree_call_rcu() avoids
> - * this problem by bypassing the sheaves layer entirely on PREEMPT_RT.
> + * this problem by passing allow_spin = false on PREEMPT_RT.
by passing SLAB_FREE_NOLOCK ?
> *
> * However, lockdep still complains that it is invalid to acquire spinlock_t
> * while holding raw_spinlock_t, even on !PREEMPT_RT where spinlock_t is a
> * spinning lock. Tell lockdep that acquiring spinlock_t is valid here
> - * by temporarily raising the wait-type to LD_WAIT_CONFIG.
> + * by temporarily raising the wait-type to LD_WAIT_CONFIG. Skip the lockdep map
> + * on PREEMPT_RT to avoid suppressing valid lockdep warnings.
> */
> static DEFINE_WAIT_OVERRIDE_MAP(kfree_rcu_sheaf_map, LD_WAIT_CONFIG);
>
> @@ -6080,10 +6081,10 @@ bool __kfree_rcu_sheaf(struct kmem_cache *s, void *obj, unsigned int free_flags)
> struct slab_sheaf *rcu_sheaf;
> bool allow_spin = free_flags_allow_spinning(free_flags);
>
> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT)))
> - return false;
> + VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) && allow_spin);
>
> - lock_map_acquire_try(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map);
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))
> + lock_map_acquire_try(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map);
>
> if (!local_trylock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock))
> goto fail;
> @@ -6181,12 +6182,14 @@ bool __kfree_rcu_sheaf(struct kmem_cache *s, void *obj, unsigned int free_flags)
> local_unlock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock);
>
> stat(s, FREE_RCU_SHEAF);
> - lock_map_release(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map);
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))
> + lock_map_release(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map);
> return true;
>
> fail:
> stat(s, FREE_RCU_SHEAF_FAIL);
> - lock_map_release(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map);
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT))
> + lock_map_release(&kfree_rcu_sheaf_map);
> return false;
> }
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-21 10:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-20 12:44 [PATCH slab/for-next v4 0/8] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() and improve slub_kunit coverage Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 1/8] mm/slab, slub_kunit: register kprobe to trigger _nolock APIs Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 12:56 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-22 3:27 ` hu.shengming
2026-07-22 7:16 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-22 8:32 ` hu.shengming
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 2/8] mm/slab: handle the !allow_spin case in kfree_rcu_sheaf() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:11 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-21 10:07 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-07-22 7:28 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-22 7:37 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-07-22 7:39 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 3/8] mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:01 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 4/8] mm/slab: extend deferred free mechanism to handle rcu sheaves Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:03 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-23 10:27 ` hu.shengming
2026-07-24 11:42 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-24 14:10 ` hu.shengming
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 5/8] mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 12:56 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-23 5:39 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-23 9:46 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-07-23 10:02 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-21 10:46 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) [this message]
2026-07-22 7:41 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 6/8] mm/slab: introduce struct kvfree_rcu_head for kvfree_rcu batching Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-21 11:06 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-07-22 7:42 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 7/8] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-07-20 13:07 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-21 13:09 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-07-22 8:15 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-22 10:05 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-07-22 13:03 ` Harry Yoo
2026-07-20 12:44 ` [PATCH slab/for-next v4 8/8] slub_kunit: extend the test for kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
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=12c63386-f96e-421e-b34c-00548d016f69@kernel.org \
--to=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=hao.li@linux.dev \
--cc=harry@kernel.org \
--cc=hu.shengming@zte.com.cn \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joelagnelf@nvidia.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=pfalcato@suse.de \
--cc=puranjay@kernel.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang@linux.dev \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=urezki@gmail.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®