Message ID | 20230315181902.4177819-5-joel@joelfernandes.org (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Not Applicable |
Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
Headers | show |
Series | None | expand |
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 2:19 PM Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote: > > From: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@gmail.com> > > The kfree_rcu() and kvfree_rcu() macros' single-argument forms are > deprecated. Therefore switch to the new kfree_rcu_mightsleep() and > kvfree_rcu_mightsleep() variants. The goal is to avoid accidental use > of the single-argument forms, which can introduce functionality bugs in > atomic contexts and latency bugs in non-atomic contexts. > > Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> > Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Could anyone from the networking side Ack this patch so we can take it for 6.4? Eric or David? - Joel > Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@joelfernandes.org> > --- > net/core/sysctl_net_core.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c > index 74842b453407..782273bb93c2 100644 > --- a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c > +++ b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c > @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static int rps_sock_flow_sysctl(struct ctl_table *table, int write, > if (orig_sock_table) { > static_branch_dec(&rps_needed); > static_branch_dec(&rfs_needed); > - kvfree_rcu(orig_sock_table); > + kvfree_rcu_mightsleep(orig_sock_table); > } > } > } > @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ static int flow_limit_cpu_sysctl(struct ctl_table *table, int write, > lockdep_is_held(&flow_limit_update_mutex)); > if (cur && !cpumask_test_cpu(i, mask)) { > RCU_INIT_POINTER(sd->flow_limit, NULL); > - kfree_rcu(cur); > + kfree_rcu_mightsleep(cur); > } else if (!cur && cpumask_test_cpu(i, mask)) { > cur = kzalloc_node(len, GFP_KERNEL, > cpu_to_node(i)); > -- > 2.40.0.rc1.284.g88254d51c5-goog >
On Sun, 26 Mar 2023 08:28:45 -0400 Joel Fernandes wrote: > > Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> > > Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> > > Could anyone from the networking side Ack this patch so we can take it for 6.4? > > Eric or David? Let me help you. Perhaps it's a data point against keeping maintainers in an alphabetical order :-) Acked-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
diff --git a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c index 74842b453407..782273bb93c2 100644 --- a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c +++ b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ static int rps_sock_flow_sysctl(struct ctl_table *table, int write, if (orig_sock_table) { static_branch_dec(&rps_needed); static_branch_dec(&rfs_needed); - kvfree_rcu(orig_sock_table); + kvfree_rcu_mightsleep(orig_sock_table); } } } @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ static int flow_limit_cpu_sysctl(struct ctl_table *table, int write, lockdep_is_held(&flow_limit_update_mutex)); if (cur && !cpumask_test_cpu(i, mask)) { RCU_INIT_POINTER(sd->flow_limit, NULL); - kfree_rcu(cur); + kfree_rcu_mightsleep(cur); } else if (!cur && cpumask_test_cpu(i, mask)) { cur = kzalloc_node(len, GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(i));