On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 02:19:03PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 11:11 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 02:05:11PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > On Tue, 2019-07-23 at 10:55 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > I think it's a bit of a landmine, to be honest. How about we have kvfree() > > > > call vfree_atomic() instead? > > > > > > Not a bad idea, though it means more overhead for the vfree case. > > > > > > Since we're spitballing here...could we have kvfree figure out whether > > > it's running in a context where it would need to queue it instead and > > > only do it in that case? > > > > > > We currently have to figure that out for the might_sleep_if anyway. We > > > could just have it DTRT instead of printk'ing and dumping the stack in > > > that case. > > > > I don't think we have a generic way to determine if we're currently > > holding a spinlock. ie this can fail: > > > > spin_lock(&my_lock); > > kvfree(p); > > spin_unlock(&my_lock); > > > > If we're preemptible, we can check the preempt count, but !CONFIG_PREEMPT > > doesn't record the number of spinlocks currently taken. > > Ahh right...that makes sense. > > Al also suggested on IRC that we could add a kvfree_atomic if that were > useful. That might be good for new callers, but we'd probably need a > patch like this one to suss out which of the existing kvfree callers > would need to switch to using it. > > I think you're quite right that this is a landmine. That said, this > seems like something we ought to try to clean up. I'd rather add a kvfree_fast(). So something like this: diff --git a/mm/util.c b/mm/util.c index bab284d69c8c..992f0332dced 100644 --- a/mm/util.c +++ b/mm/util.c @@ -470,6 +470,28 @@ void *kvmalloc_node(size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node) } EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvmalloc_node); +/** + * kvfree_fast() - Free memory. + * @addr: Pointer to allocated memory. + * + * kvfree_fast frees memory allocated by any of vmalloc(), kmalloc() or + * kvmalloc(). It is slightly more efficient to use kfree() or vfree() if + * you are certain that you know which one to use. + * + * Context: Either preemptible task context or not-NMI interrupt. Must not + * hold a spinlock as it can sleep. + */ +void kvfree_fast(const void *addr) +{ + might_sleep(); + + if (is_vmalloc_addr(addr)) + vfree(addr); + else + kfree(addr); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvfree_fast); + /** * kvfree() - Free memory. * @addr: Pointer to allocated memory. @@ -478,12 +500,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvmalloc_node); * It is slightly more efficient to use kfree() or vfree() if you are certain * that you know which one to use. * - * Context: Either preemptible task context or not-NMI interrupt. + * Context: Any context except NMI. */ void kvfree(const void *addr) { if (is_vmalloc_addr(addr)) - vfree(addr); + vfree_atomic(addr); else kfree(addr); }