[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2203021012250.5895@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 10:14:00 +0100 (CET)
From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To: cgel.zte@...il.com
cc: mcgrof@...nel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lv Ruyi <lv.ruyi@....com.cn>,
Zeal Robot <zealci@....com.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module: avoid calling synchronize_rcu()
Hi,
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022, cgel.zte@...il.com wrote:
> From: Lv Ruyi (CGEL ZTE) <lv.ruyi@....com.cn>
>
> Kfree_rcu() usually results in even simpler code than does
> synchronize_rcu() without synchronize_rcu()'s multi-millisecond
> latency, so replace synchronize_rcu() with kfree_rcu().
>
> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <zealci@....com.cn>
> Signed-off-by: Lv Ruyi (CGEL ZTE) <lv.ruyi@....com.cn>
> ---
> kernel/module.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
> index 6cea788fd965..767b5f9e5819 100644
> --- a/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/kernel/module.c
> @@ -4138,8 +4138,7 @@ static int load_module(struct load_info *info, const char __user *uargs,
> ddebug_cleanup:
> ftrace_release_mod(mod);
> dynamic_debug_remove(mod, info->debug);
> - synchronize_rcu();
> - kfree(mod->args);
> + kfree_rcu(mod->args);
this has been proposed already. synchronize_rcu() and kfree() here are not
really tied together. See the discussion at
https://lore.kernel.org/all/alpine.LSU.2.21.2111301132220.3922@pobox.suse.cz/T/#u
Regards
Miroslav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists