From: "Chuyi Zhou" <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com>
To: "Muchun Song" <muchun.song@linux.dev>
Cc: <tglx@linutronix.de>, <mingo@redhat.com>, <luto@kernel.org>,
<peterz@infradead.org>, <paulmck@kernel.org>, <bp@alien8.de>,
<dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
<bigeasy@linutronix.de>, <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
<rostedt@goodmis.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] smp: Free call_function_data via RCU in smpcfd_dead_cpu
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2026 15:26:23 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1f7a8944-18c8-49f4-9ca8-3322b3db5d25@bytedance.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2A193780-53DC-469A-B770-8AA5B97C7D7E@linux.dev>
Hi Muchun,
在 2026/3/10 15:05, Muchun Song 写道:
>
>
>> On Mar 2, 2026, at 15:52, Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com> wrote:
>>
>> Use rcu_read_lock to protect the hole scope of smp_call_function_many_cond
> ^
> whole
>
> BTW, The protection we often refer to actually pertains to data, not code.
> Therefore, the rcu_read_lock() here is actually preventing smp_call_function_many_cond()
> from accessing percpu csd data that has already been freed (which is
> what smpcfd_dead_cpu() does).
>
OK.
>> and wait for all read critical sections to exit before releasing percpu csd
>> data. This is a preparation for enabling preemption during csd_lock_wait().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/smp.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c
>> index 9728ba55944d..ad6073b71bbd 100644
>> --- a/kernel/smp.c
>> +++ b/kernel/smp.c
>> @@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ int smpcfd_dead_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
>> {
>> struct call_function_data *cfd = &per_cpu(cfd_data, cpu);
>>
>> + synchronize_rcu();
>> free_cpumask_var(cfd->cpumask);
>> free_cpumask_var(cfd->cpumask_ipi);
>> free_percpu(cfd->csd);
>> @@ -810,6 +811,7 @@ static void smp_call_function_many_cond(const struct cpumask *mask,
>>
>> lockdep_assert_preemption_disabled();
>>
>> + rcu_read_lock();
>> cfd = this_cpu_ptr(&cfd_data);
>> cpumask = cfd->cpumask;
>>
>> @@ -907,6 +909,7 @@ static void smp_call_function_many_cond(const struct cpumask *mask,
>>
>> if (preemptible_wait)
>> free_cpumask_var(cpumask_stack);
>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> We could call rcu_read_unlock() before free_cpumask_var() above.
I will update in the next version.
Thanks.
>
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> --
>> 2.20.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-10 7:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-02 7:52 [PATCH v2 00/12] Allow preemption during IPI completion waiting to improve real-time performance Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] smp: Disable preemption explicitly in __csd_lock_wait Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] smp: Enable preemption early in smp_call_function_single Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] smp: Remove get_cpu from smp_call_function_any Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] smp: Use on-stack cpumask in smp_call_function_many_cond Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-10 7:12 ` Muchun Song
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] smp: Free call_function_data via RCU in smpcfd_dead_cpu Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-10 7:05 ` Muchun Song
2026-03-10 7:26 ` Chuyi Zhou [this message]
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] smp: Enable preemption early in smp_call_function_many_cond Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] smp: Remove preempt_disable from smp_call_function Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-10 7:06 ` Muchun Song
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] smp: Remove preempt_disable from on_each_cpu_cond_mask Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-10 7:06 ` Muchun Song
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] scftorture: Remove preempt_disable in scftorture_invoke_one Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] x86/mm: Move flush_tlb_info back to the stack Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-02 14:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-03-03 3:20 ` Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-05 7:01 ` Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] x86/mm: Enable preemption during native_flush_tlb_multi Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-02 7:52 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] x86/mm: Enable preemption during flush_tlb_kernel_range Chuyi Zhou
2026-03-10 6:35 ` kernel test robot
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=1f7a8944-18c8-49f4-9ca8-3322b3db5d25@bytedance.com \
--to=zhouchuyi@bytedance.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®