linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] workqueue: Add an interface to taint workqueue lockdep with reclaim

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: <aPgWgAs_5XoEWri9@slm.duckdns.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 13:25:52 -1000
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>
Cc: intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
	simona.vetter@...ll.ch, christian.koenig@....com,
	pstanner@...hat.com, dakr@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] workqueue: Add an interface to taint workqueue
 lockdep with reclaim

Hello,

On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 03:06:55PM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > > Given that it's about reclaim, "memory cannot be allocated" may be a bit
> > > misleading. Can you make the description more accurate? Also, it'd be great
> 
> Can fix the comment. The rule is memory cannot be allocated in the
> context of reclaim (e.g., GFP_KERNEL).

Oh, I meant that e.g. GPF_ATOMIC or GFP_NOFS reclaims should be fine. It's
just that we can't recurse into reclaim from WQ_RECLAIM workqueue, right?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun