On Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:42:30 +0200
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 6/10/24 5:46 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 11:22:23AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >> On Sun, 9 Jun 2024 10:27:17 +0200
> >> Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> > diff --git a/fs/tracefs/inode.c b/fs/tracefs/inode.c
> >> > index 7c29f4afc23d..338c52168e61 100644
> >> > --- a/fs/tracefs/inode.c
> >> > +++ b/fs/tracefs/inode.c
> >> > @@ -53,14 +53,6 @@ static struct inode *tracefs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
> >> > return &ti->vfs_inode;
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > -static void tracefs_free_inode_rcu(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> >> > -{
> >> > - struct tracefs_inode *ti;
> >> > -
> >> > - ti = container_of(rcu, struct tracefs_inode, rcu);
> >> > - kmem_cache_free(tracefs_inode_cachep, ti);
> >>
> >> Does this work?
> >>
> >> tracefs needs to be freed via the tracefs_inode_cachep. Does
> >> kfree_rcu() handle specific frees for objects that were not allocated
> >> via kmalloc()?
> >
> > A recent change to kfree() allows it to correctly handle memory allocated
> > via kmem_cache_alloc(). News to me as of a few weeks ago. ;-)
>
> Hey, I did try not to keep that a secret :)
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230310103210.22372-8-vbabka@xxxxxxx/
>
Heh, I didn't look at that patch very deeply.
-- Steve
