On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 05:08:27PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > Hello, Joel, Paul, Ted. > > > > > Good point! > > > > Now that kfree_rcu() is on its way to being less of a hack deeply > > entangled into the bowels of RCU, this might be fairly easy to implement. > > It might well be simply a matter of a function pointer and a kvfree_rcu() > > API. Adding Uladzislau Rezki and Joel Fernandez on CC for their thoughts. > > > I think it makes sense. For example i see there is a similar demand in > the mm/list_lru.c too. As for implementation, it will not be hard, i think. > > The easiest way is to inject kvfree() support directly into existing kfree_call_rcu() > logic(probably will need to rename that function), i.e. to free vmalloc() allocations > only in "emergency path" by just calling kvfree(). So that function in its turn will > figure out if it is _vmalloc_ address or not and trigger corresponding "free" path. The other difference between ext4_kvfree_array_rcu() and kfree_rcu() is that kfree_rcu() is a magic macro which frees a structure, which has to contain a struct rcu_head. In this case, I'm freeing a pointer to set of structures, or in another case, a set of buffer_heads, which do *not* have an rcu_head structure. > struct test_kvfree_rcu { > unsigned char array[PAGE_SIZE * 2]; > struct rcu_head rcu; > }; I suspect I'd still want to use the ext4_kfree_array_rcu(), for a couple of reasons. First of all, the array is variably sized. So we don't know how big it is. That could be fixed via something like struct test_kvfree_rcu { struct rcu_head rcu; struct test_s []; }; ... but the other issue is that we have code where we have arrays of arrays, e.g.: struct ext4_group_info ***s_group_info; which is an array of array of pointers to ext4_group_info. Trying to cram in the rcu_head makes the code more complicated --- and also, resizing file systems is something that happens often, and I don't want to optimize it by keeping rcu_head structs around all the time. This is why at least for *this* use case, it's actually better to allocate temp array just before callig call_rcu(), and if I can't allocate it due to memory pressure, we'll it's OK to use synchronize_rcu() followed by kvfree(). Cheers, - Ted