[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YMzj0V8CVte/Pynx@google.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 18:20:01 +0000
From: Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>
To: Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@...o.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kael_w@...h.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/percpu: Fix gfp flag in pcpu_balance_populated
Hello,
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 11:14:36PM +0800, Wan Jiabing wrote:
> Fix coccicheck warning:
>
> ./mm/percpu.c:2045:19-29: ERROR: function pcpu_balance_populated
> called on line 2232 inside lock on line 2228 but uses GFP_KERNEL
>
> When pcpu_balance_populated() is called in pcpu_balance_workfn(),
> it helds spin_lock but use GFP_KERNEL to alloc mem, which is unsafe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wan Jiabing <wanjiabing@...o.com>
> ---
> mm/percpu.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/percpu.c b/mm/percpu.c
> index b4cebeca4c0c..4031f32e6975 100644
> --- a/mm/percpu.c
> +++ b/mm/percpu.c
> @@ -2042,7 +2042,7 @@ static void pcpu_balance_free(bool empty_only)
> static void pcpu_balance_populated(void)
> {
> /* gfp flags passed to underlying allocators */
> - const gfp_t gfp = GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_NOWARN;
> + const gfp_t gfp = GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_NOWARN;
> struct pcpu_chunk *chunk;
> int slot, nr_to_pop, ret;
>
> --
> 2.30.2
>
In both places gfp flags are passed, the pcpu_lock is dropped. So I
think this is an issue with coccicheck. Regardless, the fix wouldn't be
to switch to GFP_ATOMIC but to make the locking correct.
Thanks,
Dennis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists