On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 06:12:04PM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 04:09:51PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> > > The kfree_rcu()'s single argument name is deprecated therefore
> > > rename it to kfree_rcu_mightsleep() variant. The goal is explicitly
> > > underline that it is for sleepable contexts.
> > >
> > > Cc: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Jiri Wiesner <jwiesner@xxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_est.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_est.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_est.c
> > > index ce2a1549b304..a39baf6d1367 100644
> > > --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_est.c
> > > +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_est.c
> > > @@ -549,7 +549,7 @@ void ip_vs_stop_estimator(struct netns_ipvs *ipvs, struct ip_vs_stats *stats)
> > > __set_bit(row, kd->avail);
> > > if (!kd->tick_len[row]) {
> > > RCU_INIT_POINTER(kd->ticks[row], NULL);
> > > - kfree_rcu(td);
> >
> > I also found this kfree_rcu() without rcu_head call a few weeks ago.
> >
> > @Wiesner, @Julian: Any chance this can be turned into kfree_rcu(td, rcu_head); ?
>
> Yes, as simple as this:
>
> diff --git a/include/net/ip_vs.h b/include/net/ip_vs.h
> index c6c61100d244..6d71a5ff52df 100644
> --- a/include/net/ip_vs.h
> +++ b/include/net/ip_vs.h
> @@ -461,6 +461,7 @@ void ip_vs_stats_free(struct ip_vs_stats *stats);
>
> /* Multiple chains processed in same tick */
> struct ip_vs_est_tick_data {
> + struct rcu_head rcu_head;
> struct hlist_head chains[IPVS_EST_TICK_CHAINS];
> DECLARE_BITMAP(present, IPVS_EST_TICK_CHAINS);
> DECLARE_BITMAP(full, IPVS_EST_TICK_CHAINS);
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_est.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_est.c
> index df56073bb282..25c7118d9348 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_est.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_est.c
> @@ -549,7 +549,7 @@ void ip_vs_stop_estimator(struct netns_ipvs *ipvs, struct ip_vs_stats *stats)
> __set_bit(row, kd->avail);
> if (!kd->tick_len[row]) {
> RCU_INIT_POINTER(kd->ticks[row], NULL);
> - kfree_rcu(td);
> + kfree_rcu(td, rcu_head);
> }
> kd->est_count--;
> if (kd->est_count) {
>
> I was about to reply to Uladzislau Rezki but his patchset
> looks more like a renaming, so I'm not sure how we are about
> to integrate this change, as separate patch or as part of his
> patchset. I don't have preference, just let me know how to
> handle it.
@Uladzislau Rezki: Are you fine with dropping this patch from your
series and Julian will send us a patch for inclusion into net-next to
use the kfree_rcu(x, rcu_head) variant?
