linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] testing/radix-tree/maple: hack around kfree

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <0a3e9837-0e45-47db-9e24-2f9099ea6075@lucifer.local>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 10:47:50 +0100
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
To: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@...e.de>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Sidhartha Kumar <sidhartha.kumar@...cle.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] testing/radix-tree/maple: hack around kfree_rcu not
 existing

On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 05:28:02AM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 10:09:15PM -0400, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
> > * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> [250814 21:02]:
> > > Well, can we have this as a standalone thing, rather than as a
> > > modification to a patch whose future is uncertain?
> > >
> > > Then we can just drop "testing/radix-tree/maple: hack around kfree_rcu
> > > not existing", yes?
> > >
> > > Some expansion of "fixes the build for the VMA userland tests" would be
> > > helpful.
> >
> > Ah, this is somewhat messy.
> >
> > Pedro removed unnecessary rcu calls with the newer slab reality as you
> > can directly call kfree instead of specifying the kmem_cache.
> >
> > But the patch is partially already in Vlastimil's sheaves work and we'd
> > like his work to go through his branch, so the future of this particular
> > patch is a bit messy.
> >
> > Maybe we should just drop the related patches that caused the issue from
> > the mm-new branch?  That way we don't need a fix at all.
> >
> > And when Vlastimil is around, we can get him to pick up the set
> > including the fix.
> >
> > Doing things this way will allow Vlastimil the avoid conflicts on
> > rebase, and restore the userspace testing in mm-new.
> >
> > Does that make sense to everyone?
>
> Sounds good to me, I didn't realise that both the original series at [0])
> (which introduced the test fail) and the follow up at [1] were intended to
> be dropped, I thought only [1] but dropping [0] obviously also fixes it!
>
> And it looks like Andrew's done so and tests now fully working in mm-new
> again so I'm happy :)

OK this isn't the case.

Can you clarify that you want to drop [0] and explicitly reply there asking
Andrew to drop it just so all is certain?

Because right now VMA tests are still broken in mm-new :(

>
> Cheers, Lorenzo
>
> [0]:https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250718172138.103116-1-pfalcato@suse.de/
> [1]:https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250812162124.59417-1-pfalcato@suse.de/

Thanks, Lorenzo