From: Harry Yoo <harry@kernel.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@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>
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 for-next v3 0/9] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() and improve slub_kunit coverage
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2026 20:43:44 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9c120401-0e1e-41d8-b662-10339e302c91@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260615-kfree_rcu_nolock-v3-0-70a54f3775bb@kernel.org>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8397 bytes --]
Now I'm investigating and fixing pre-existing two kmalloc_nolock() bugs
and (hopefully) planning to post the fixes later this week.
I will later rebase the this series onto Vlastimil's slab_alloc_flags v3
and the kmalloc_nolock() fixes, and address human and sashiko's
comments.
But this should be enough for review.
Thanks!
On 6/15/26 8:05 PM, Harry Yoo (Oracle) wrote:
> Not the best time to post a series, but didn't want to delay posting
> the series for too long. no pressures ;) This is aimed to be queued
> for review and testing after the merge window closes.
>
> This series is based on next-20260612, and is also available on
> git.kernel.org [3].
>
> To RCU folks: It would be great if you could kindly take a quick look at
> patch 4 and either ack or nack the patch ;)
>
> To BPF folks: Ulad asked to share workloads to measure performance
> of kfree_rcu_nolock(). Unfortunately, I focused more on correctness
> and have not spent much effort on that. It would be nice if BPF folks
> could help evaluate it on their relevant workloads.
>
> To PREEMPT_RT folks: The most relevant part is allowing
> kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT (patch 6). It carefully avoids sleeping
> by acquiring the locks via local_trylock() or spin_trylock_irqsave()
> to avoid sleeping within a raw spinlock. When trylock or unlock is
> unsafe, kmalloc_nolock() always fails.
>
> Changes since RFC v2
> ====================
>
> Reduced complexity and intrusiveness (Uladzislau Rezki)
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> While discussing concerns about the complexity of adding allow_spin
> handling with Ulad (Thanks!), I realized that adding complexity to the
> kvfree_rcu batching is not strictly necessary: only slab objects need to
> be batched, they are already batched by rcu sheaves, and slab already
> supports unknown context. So it is enough to implement only a minimal
> fallback for the sheaves path.
>
> I tried to avoid making intrusive changes to the existing kvfree_rcu
> path as much as possible. struct rcu_ptr is renamed to kfree_rcu_head
> following Vlastimil's suggestion, and it is used only in the
> kfree_rcu_nolock() path for now.
>
> As a result, the complexity is significantly reduced and the series
> became much less intrusive. This is also reflected well in the diffstat
> below.
>
> RFC v2 diffstat:
> 8 files changed, 514 insertions(+), 163 deletions(-)
>
> v3 diffstat:
> 6 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 105 deletions(-)
>
> v3 diffstat (slub_kunit improvements - patch 1, 2, 9 excluded):
> 5 files changed, 199 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)
>
> kfree_rcu_sheaf() PREEMPT_RT support (Vlastimil Babka)
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> As suggested by Vlastimil (Thanks!), kfree_rcu_sheaf() can now be used
> on PREEMPT_RT as well, by always assuming allow_spin is false on
> PREEMPT_RT.
>
> slub_kunit enhancements
> -----------------------
>
> - Currently the test is skipped when there is no hardware PMU. This can
> happen on machines without a PMU, or in virtualized environments
> (e.g., automated testing or virtme). Implement a fallback based on SW
> perf events so that the test can still run in such environments, even
> though the coverage is slightly smaller.
>
> - While testing on PREEMPT_RT, I found that kmalloc_nolock() fails every
> time, so the fallback path is not properly tested. This is a limitation
> of perf events: the handler is called in NMI (HW perf events) or
> interrupt context (SW perf events), where kmalloc_nolock() cannot
> succeed.
>
> slub_kunit now registers a kprobe pre-handler at the points in the slab
> allocator where lockdep_assert_held() is invoked. The pre-handler calls
> kmalloc_nolock() and friends, to improve coverage on PREEMPT_RT instead
> of relying on perf events.
>
> One thing that needs to be further explored
> -------------------------------------------
>
> The global deferred_free_by_rcu (introduced by patch 8) list for the
> fallback should probably be per-CPU [5].
>
> Actual Cover Letter
> ===================
>
> This series improves kmalloc_nolock() and kfree_nolock() coverage
> in slub_kunit (patch 1 and 2) and introduces kfree_rcu_nolock() for
> an unknown context as suggested by Alexei Starovoitov.
>
> Unknown context means the caller does not know whether spinning on a lock
> is safe (e.g., a BPF program attached to an arbitrary kernel function or
> in NMI context).
>
> The slab allocator already supports unknown context via kmalloc_nolock()
> and kfree_nolock(), but te slab allocator does not support freeing
> objects by RCU in unknown context.
>
> It is not ideal to have completely separate batching for unknown context
> because the worst scenario where spinning on a lock would lead to
> deadlock is very rare, and in most cases, it is safe to use the
> existing mechanism (kfree_rcu_sheaf()).
>
> Since most part of the slab allocator already supports unknown context
> and sheaves support batching kvfree_rcu() calls for slab objects,
> implement kfree_rcu_nolock() with minimal changes by teaching
> kfree_rcu_sheaf() how to support unknown context and making
> it a little bit harder to allocate an empty sheaf, instead of making
> intrusive changes to the existing kvfree_rcu batching logic.
>
> kfree_rcu_nolock() tries to free the object to the rcu sheaf if
> trylock succeeds. Once the rcu sheaf becomes full, it is submitted to
> RCU via call_rcu() if spinning is allowed or IRQs are enabled (to avoid
> calling call_rcu() in the middle of call_rcu()). Otherwise, call_rcu()
> is deferred via irq work.
>
> In unknown context, when there is no sheaf available, kfree_rcu_sheaf()
> falls back to defer_kfree_rcu(), which inserts the object to a global
> lockless list [5] and those objects are freed after synchronize_rcu() in
> a workqueue.
>
> Unlike kfree_rcu(), only the 2-argument variant is supported.
> This is because the last resort of the 1-arg variant is
> synchronize_rcu(), which cannot be used in an unknown context.
>
> As suggested by Alexei Starovoitov, kfree_rcu_nolock() can be used with
> struct kfree_rcu_head (8 bytes), which is smaller than struct rcu_head
> (16 bytes).
>
> For more background and future plans, please see [4].
>
> [1] RFC v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260206093410.160622-1-harry.yoo@oracle.com
>
> [2] RFC v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260416091022.36823-1-harry@kernel.org
>
> [3] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/harry/linux.git/log/?h=kfree_rcu_nolock-v3r3
>
> [4] kmalloc_nolock() follow-ups, including kfree_rcu_nolock(),
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/esepccfhqg7m6jo76ns2znj2cnuaepx2xvw5zaygtwohq4psma@563ypprp6rr3
>
> [5] However, we should probably make the list percpu because,
> unlike RFC v2, it can be triggered more frequently under memory
> pressure.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/805c33d7-3a7b-470c-bd9d-065717a3e3e2@paulmck-laptop
>
> Signed-off-by: Harry Yoo (Oracle) <harry@kernel.org>
> ---
> Harry Yoo (Oracle) (9):
> slub_kunit: fall back to SW perf events when HW PMU is not available
> mm/slab, slub_kunit: register kprobe to trigger _nolock APIs
> mm/slab: handle the !allow_spin case in kfree_rcu_sheaf()
> mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled
> mm/slab: extend deferred free mechanism to handle rcu sheaves
> mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT
> mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock()
> mm/slab: introduce struct kfree_rcu_head and use in kfree_rcu_nolock()
> slub_kunit: extend the test for kfree_rcu_nolock()
>
> include/linux/rcupdate.h | 12 +++
> include/linux/types.h | 4 +
> lib/tests/slub_kunit.c | 174 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> mm/slab.h | 5 +-
> mm/slab_common.c | 38 ++++++--
> mm/slub.c | 242 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 6 files changed, 370 insertions(+), 105 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: c425609d6ac4012c8bbf01ec2e10e801b1923a7b
> change-id: 20260615-kfree_rcu_nolock-e5502555992f
>
> Best regards,
--
Cheers,
Harry / Hyeonggon
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-15 11:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-15 11:05 Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 1/9] slub_kunit: fall back to SW perf events when HW PMU is not available Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:14 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 12:58 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-15 20:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-06-16 5:23 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 2/9] mm/slab, slub_kunit: register kprobe to trigger _nolock APIs Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:25 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 20:04 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-06-16 6:57 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-24 13:41 ` Pedro Falcato
2026-06-29 7:34 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-29 8:20 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 3/9] mm/slab: handle the !allow_spin case in kfree_rcu_sheaf() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:24 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-16 7:55 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-16 9:20 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-17 5:32 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-17 5:58 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-24 14:28 ` Pedro Falcato
2026-06-29 8:01 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 4/9] mm/slab: use call_rcu() in unknown context if irqs are enabled Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:25 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-16 9:51 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-24 14:30 ` Pedro Falcato
2026-06-29 8:19 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-15 11:05 ` [PATCH for-next v3 5/9] mm/slab: extend deferred free mechanism to handle rcu sheaves Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:24 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-16 13:03 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-24 14:37 ` Pedro Falcato
2026-06-15 11:06 ` [PATCH for-next v3 6/9] mm/slab: allow kfree_rcu_sheaf() on PREEMPT_RT Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-16 17:24 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-17 5:14 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-17 5:38 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-17 20:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-06-18 12:46 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-18 16:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-06-15 11:06 ` [PATCH for-next v3 7/9] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:22 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-16 17:28 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-21 0:29 ` XIAO WU
2026-06-22 5:28 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-22 14:56 ` XIAO WU
2026-06-25 5:27 ` Harry Yoo
2026-06-15 11:06 ` [PATCH for-next v3 8/9] mm/slab: introduce struct kfree_rcu_head and use in kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-15 11:22 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-16 17:36 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-15 11:06 ` [PATCH for-next v3 9/9] slub_kunit: extend the test for kfree_rcu_nolock() Harry Yoo (Oracle)
2026-06-16 17:38 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-15 11:43 ` Harry Yoo [this message]
2026-06-15 20:28 ` [PATCH for-next v3 0/9] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() and improve slub_kunit coverage Alexei Starovoitov
2026-06-16 4:57 ` Harry Yoo
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=9c120401-0e1e-41d8-b662-10339e302c91@kernel.org \
--to=harry@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=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 \
--cc=vbabka@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
Powered by JetHome