To stress and test a single argument of kfree_rcu() call, we
should to have a special coverage for it. We used to have it
in the test-suite related to vmalloc stressing. The reason is
the rcuscale is a correct place for RCU related things.
Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c
index 06491d5530db..e17745a155f9 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c
@@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ torture_param(bool, shutdown, RCUSCALE_SHUTDOWN,
torture_param(int, verbose, 1, "Enable verbose debugging printk()s");
torture_param(int, writer_holdoff, 0, "Holdoff (us) between GPs, zero to disable");
torture_param(int, kfree_rcu_test, 0, "Do we run a kfree_rcu() scale test?");
+torture_param(int, kfree_rcu_test_single, 0, "Do we run a kfree_rcu() single-argument scale test?");
torture_param(int, kfree_mult, 1, "Multiple of kfree_obj size to allocate.");
static char *scale_type = "rcu";
@@ -667,10 +668,14 @@ kfree_scale_thread(void *arg)
for (i = 0; i < kfree_alloc_num; i++) {
alloc_ptr = kmalloc(kfree_mult * sizeof(struct kfree_obj), GFP_KERNEL);
+
if (!alloc_ptr)
return -ENOMEM;
- kfree_rcu(alloc_ptr, rh);
+ if (kfree_rcu_test_single)
+ kfree_rcu(alloc_ptr);
+ else
+ kfree_rcu(alloc_ptr, rh);
}
cond_resched();
--
2.20.1
