On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 2:36 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 2:29 PM Chris Li <chrisl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 2:19 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The execution sequence is like this:
> > > >
> > > > count = min(pcp->count, count);
> > > >
> > > > /* Ensure requested pindex is drained first. */
> > > > pindex = pindex - 1;
> > > > bpf_injected_spin_lock_irqsave {
> > > > alloc_page();
> > > > original spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags) ;
> > > > }
> > >
> > > bpf doesn't call into alloc_page() or slab alloc or pcpu alloc from
> > > tracing progs.
> > > All memory is preallocated.
That is good to know. Thanks.
> >
> > Here is the other patch submission thread which have more detail of
> > how to reproduce it:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20230817-free_pcppages_bulk-v1-1-c14574a9f80c@xxxxxxxxxx/
> >
> > It is on older version of the kernel.
>
> Please demonstrate the issue on the latest kernel.
> It's an unnecessary time sink for everyone to review patches
> targeting an issue in the old kernel.
Thanks, that is the answer I am looking for. That is why I tag it
as RFC.
>
> > > Can you reproduce the issue on the latest upstream kernel?
> >
> > Hope, the fix on the BPF side went in as commit c66a36af7ba3a628.
> > I am not aware of other cases.
>
> That was a temporary workaround on perf side.
> bpf task local storage was properly fixed later.
Ack.
> > It seems the consensus is so far is that we don't support BPF doing
> > nested allocation on spin locks.
> > That will implite any function called under the spinlocks as well.
>
> We're still talking past each other. bpf uses preallocated memory.
> It might look like bpf prog is allocating, but it's actually
> not calling into slab.
Ack.
> > Do we care about adding more warnings on this kind of allocation at all?
>
> bpf doesn't mess with mm state.
> If you somehow managed to cause mm splat with bpf prog talk to bpf folks first.
> It's a bug somewhere in bpf. Not with mm.
Noted. It started as a MM clean up patch. Should include you earlier.
I will spit out the part 2 of the patch as clean up without touching
pcp->count then.
Chris
