linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] slab updates for 6.11

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <88ed491f-4ae4-4cfc-9be2-dda3de56813c@suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 18:46:29 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
 David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
 LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
 Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
 RCU <rcu@...r.kernel.org>, Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] slab updates for 6.11

On 9/26/24 18:40, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 06:35:27PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 9/18/24 16:40, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
>> >>
>> > Thank you for valuable feedback! Indeed it is hard to follow, even
>> > though it works correctly.
>> > I will add the comment and also break the loop on first queuing as you
>> > suggested!
>> > 
>> > It does not make sense to loop further because following iterations
>> > are never successful
>> > thus never overwrite "queued" variable(it never reaches the
>> > queue_rcu_work() call).
>> > 
>> > <snip>
>> >          bool queued = false;
>> >          ...
>> >          for (i = 0; i < KFREE_N_BATCHES; i++) {
>> >                 if (need_offload_krc(krcp)) {
>> >                          queued = queue_rcu_work(system_wq, &krwp->rcu_work);
>> >          ...
>> >          return queued;
>> > <snip>
>> > 
>> > if we queued, "if(need_offload_krc())" condition is never true anymore.
>> > 
>> > Below refactoring makes it clear. I will send the patch to address it.
>> 
>> Looks good, AFAICT. Can you send the full patch then? Thanks.
>> 
> I will do so. We can send it from RCU-side for rcX, this merge window or
> you can do it.
> 
> What is the best for you?

Guess I could do via slab tree since the original commit went there too.

Thanks

> --
> Uladzislau Rezki