From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Courtney Cavin <courtney.cavin@sonymobile.com>
Subject: Re: Preemptible idr_alloc() in QRTR code
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 00:41:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210127004124.GP308988@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210126183534.GA90035@C02TD0UTHF1T.local>
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 06:36:02PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 11:00:05AM -0600, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > On Tue 26 Jan 10:21 CST 2021, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 02:58:33PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 10:47:34AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > When fuzzing arm64 with Syzkaller, I'm seeing some splats where
> > > > > this_cpu_ptr() is used in the bowels of idr_alloc(), by way of
> > > > > radix_tree_node_alloc(), in a preemptible context:
> > > >
> > > > I sent a patch to fix this last June. The maintainer seems to be
> > > > under the impression that I care an awful lot more about their
> > > > code than I do.
> > > >
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20200605120037.17427-1-willy@infradead.org/
> > >
> > > Ah; I hadn't spotted the (glaringly obvious) GFP_ATOMIC abuse, thanks
> > > for the pointer, and sorry for the noise.
> > >
> >
> > I'm afraid this isn't as obvious to me as it is to you. Are you saying
> > that one must not use GFP_ATOMIC in non-atomic contexts?
> >
> > That said, glancing at the code I'm puzzled to why it would use
> > GFP_ATOMIC.
>
> I'm also not entirely sure about the legitimacy of GFP_ATOMIC outside of
> atomic contexts -- I couldn't spot any documentation saying that wasn't
> legitimate, but Matthew's commit message implies so, and it sticks out
> as odd.
It's actually an assumption in the radix tree code. If you say you
can't be preempted by saying GFP_ATOMIC, it takes you at your word and
does some things which cannot be done in preemptable context.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-27 7:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-26 10:47 Mark Rutland
2021-01-26 14:58 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-01-26 16:21 ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-26 17:00 ` Bjorn Andersson
2021-01-26 18:36 ` Mark Rutland
2021-01-27 0:41 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
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=20210127004124.GP308988@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=courtney.cavin@sonymobile.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®