Message ID | SEZPR01MB45270BCD2BC28813FCB39AEDA8D72@SEZPR01MB4527.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | xfs: add __GFP_NOLOCKDEP when allocating memory in xfs_attr_shortform_list() | expand |
On 6/27/24 8:12 AM, Jiwei Sun wrote: > From: Jiwei Sun <sunjw10@lenovo.com> > > If the following configuration is set > CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y > > The following warning log appears, Was just about to send this. :) I had talked to dchinner about this and he also suggested that this was missed in the series that removed GFP_NOFS, i.e. [PATCH 00/12] xfs: remove remaining kmem interfaces and GFP_NOFS usage at https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240622094411.GA830005@ceph-admin/T/ So, I think this could also use one or both of: Fixes: 204fae32d5f7 ("xfs: clean up remaining GFP_NOFS users") Fixes: 94a69db2367e ("xfs: use __GFP_NOLOCKDEP instead of GFP_NOFS") ... > This is a false positive. If a node is getting reclaimed, it cannot be > the target of a flistxattr operation. Commit 6dcde60efd94 ("xfs: more > lockdep whackamole with kmem_alloc*") has the similar root cause. > > Fix the issue by adding __GFP_NOLOCKDEP in order to shut up lockdep. > > Signed-off-by: Jiwei Sun <sunjw10@lenovo.com> > Suggested-by: Adrian Huang <ahuang12@lenovo.com> > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c > index 5c947e5ce8b8..506ade0befa4 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c > @@ -114,7 +114,8 @@ xfs_attr_shortform_list( > * It didn't all fit, so we have to sort everything on hashval. > */ > sbsize = sf->count * sizeof(*sbuf); > - sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL); > + sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL | > + __GFP_NOLOCKDEP); Minor nitpick, style-wise we seem to do: sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOLOCKDEP | __GFP_NOFAIL); in most other places, and not split the flags onto 2 lines, since you need to add a line anyway. Otherwise, Acked-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> > /* > * Scan the attribute list for the rest of the entries, storing
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 11:25:10AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 6/27/24 8:12 AM, Jiwei Sun wrote: > > From: Jiwei Sun <sunjw10@lenovo.com> > > > > If the following configuration is set > > CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y > > > > The following warning log appears, > > Was just about to send this. :) > > I had talked to dchinner about this and he also suggested that this was > missed in the series that removed GFP_NOFS, i.e. > > [PATCH 00/12] xfs: remove remaining kmem interfaces and GFP_NOFS usage > at https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240622094411.GA830005@ceph-admin/T/ > > So, I think this could also use one or both of: > > Fixes: 204fae32d5f7 ("xfs: clean up remaining GFP_NOFS users") > Fixes: 94a69db2367e ("xfs: use __GFP_NOLOCKDEP instead of GFP_NOFS") > > ... > > > This is a false positive. If a node is getting reclaimed, it cannot be > > the target of a flistxattr operation. Commit 6dcde60efd94 ("xfs: more > > lockdep whackamole with kmem_alloc*") has the similar root cause. > > > > Fix the issue by adding __GFP_NOLOCKDEP in order to shut up lockdep. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiwei Sun <sunjw10@lenovo.com> > > Suggested-by: Adrian Huang <ahuang12@lenovo.com> > > --- > > fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c > > index 5c947e5ce8b8..506ade0befa4 100644 > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c > > @@ -114,7 +114,8 @@ xfs_attr_shortform_list( > > * It didn't all fit, so we have to sort everything on hashval. > > */ > > sbsize = sf->count * sizeof(*sbuf); > > - sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL); > > + sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL | > > + __GFP_NOLOCKDEP); > > Minor nitpick, style-wise we seem to do: > > sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, > GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOLOCKDEP | __GFP_NOFAIL); > > in most other places, and not split the flags onto 2 lines, since you need > to add a line anyway. > > Otherwise, > > Acked-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> Hey, could you all please read the list before sending duplicate patches? https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20240622082631.2661148-1-leo.lilong@huawei.com/ --D > > /* > > * Scan the attribute list for the rest of the entries, storing > >
On 6/29/24 01:01, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 11:25:10AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 6/27/24 8:12 AM, Jiwei Sun wrote: >>> From: Jiwei Sun <sunjw10@lenovo.com> >>> >>> If the following configuration is set >>> CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y >>> >>> The following warning log appears, >> >> Was just about to send this. :) >> >> I had talked to dchinner about this and he also suggested that this was >> missed in the series that removed GFP_NOFS, i.e. >> >> [PATCH 00/12] xfs: remove remaining kmem interfaces and GFP_NOFS usage >> at https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240622094411.GA830005@ceph-admin/T/ >> >> So, I think this could also use one or both of: >> >> Fixes: 204fae32d5f7 ("xfs: clean up remaining GFP_NOFS users") >> Fixes: 94a69db2367e ("xfs: use __GFP_NOLOCKDEP instead of GFP_NOFS") >> >> ... >> >>> This is a false positive. If a node is getting reclaimed, it cannot be >>> the target of a flistxattr operation. Commit 6dcde60efd94 ("xfs: more >>> lockdep whackamole with kmem_alloc*") has the similar root cause. >>> >>> Fix the issue by adding __GFP_NOLOCKDEP in order to shut up lockdep. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jiwei Sun <sunjw10@lenovo.com> >>> Suggested-by: Adrian Huang <ahuang12@lenovo.com> >>> --- >>> fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c | 3 ++- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c >>> index 5c947e5ce8b8..506ade0befa4 100644 >>> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c >>> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c >>> @@ -114,7 +114,8 @@ xfs_attr_shortform_list( >>> * It didn't all fit, so we have to sort everything on hashval. >>> */ >>> sbsize = sf->count * sizeof(*sbuf); >>> - sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL); >>> + sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL | >>> + __GFP_NOLOCKDEP); >> >> Minor nitpick, style-wise we seem to do: >> >> sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, >> GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOLOCKDEP | __GFP_NOFAIL); >> >> in most other places, and not split the flags onto 2 lines, since you need >> to add a line anyway. >> >> Otherwise, >> >> Acked-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> > > Hey, could you all please read the list before sending duplicate > patches? I'm very sorry for wasting everyone's time because of missing that patch. Thank you for pointing out this point, @Darrick. And thank you also for your review and suggestions, @Eric. Thanks, Regards, Jiwei > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20240622082631.2661148-1-leo.lilong@huawei.com/ > > --D > >>> /* >>> * Scan the attribute list for the rest of the entries, storing >> >>
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c index 5c947e5ce8b8..506ade0befa4 100644 --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_attr_list.c @@ -114,7 +114,8 @@ xfs_attr_shortform_list( * It didn't all fit, so we have to sort everything on hashval. */ sbsize = sf->count * sizeof(*sbuf); - sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL); + sbp = sbuf = kmalloc(sbsize, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL | + __GFP_NOLOCKDEP); /* * Scan the attribute list for the rest of the entries, storing