linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 04/23] slab: add sheaf support for batching 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <21767827-9bc3-4d49-8987-6a4b7654e653@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 11:50:03 +0000
From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To: Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...nel.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
 "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
 Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
 Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
 Sidhartha Kumar <sidhartha.kumar@...cle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
 maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
 Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>,
 Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...mlin.com>,
 Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...el.com>,
 "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 04/23] slab: add sheaf support for batching kfree_rcu()
 operations


On 27/11/2025 11:38, Jon Hunter wrote:
> 
> 
> On 31/10/2025 21:32, Daniel Gomez wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/09/2025 10.01, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>> Extend the sheaf infrastructure for more efficient kfree_rcu() handling.
>>> For caches with sheaves, on each cpu maintain a rcu_free sheaf in
>>> addition to main and spare sheaves.
>>>
>>> kfree_rcu() operations will try to put objects on this sheaf. Once full,
>>> the sheaf is detached and submitted to call_rcu() with a handler that
>>> will try to put it in the barn, or flush to slab pages using bulk free,
>>> when the barn is full. Then a new empty sheaf must be obtained to put
>>> more objects there.
>>>
>>> It's possible that no free sheaves are available to use for a new
>>> rcu_free sheaf, and the allocation in kfree_rcu() context can only use
>>> GFP_NOWAIT and thus may fail. In that case, fall back to the existing
>>> kfree_rcu() implementation.
>>>
>>> Expected advantages:
>>> - batching the kfree_rcu() operations, that could eventually replace the
>>>    existing batching
>>> - sheaves can be reused for allocations via barn instead of being
>>>    flushed to slabs, which is more efficient
>>>    - this includes cases where only some cpus are allowed to process rcu
>>>      callbacks (Android)
>>>
>>> Possible disadvantage:
>>> - objects might be waiting for more than their grace period (it is
>>>    determined by the last object freed into the sheaf), increasing 
>>> memory
>>>    usage - but the existing batching does that too.
>>>
>>> Only implement this for CONFIG_KVFREE_RCU_BATCHED as the tiny
>>> implementation favors smaller memory footprint over performance.
>>>
>>> Also for now skip the usage of rcu sheaf for CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT as the
>>> contexts where kfree_rcu() is called might not be compatible with taking
>>> a barn spinlock or a GFP_NOWAIT allocation of a new sheaf taking a
>>> spinlock - the current kfree_rcu() implementation avoids doing that.
>>>
>>> Teach kvfree_rcu_barrier() to flush all rcu_free sheaves from all caches
>>> that have them. This is not a cheap operation, but the barrier usage is
>>> rare - currently kmem_cache_destroy() or on module unload.
>>>
>>> Add CONFIG_SLUB_STATS counters free_rcu_sheaf and free_rcu_sheaf_fail to
>>> count how many kfree_rcu() used the rcu_free sheaf successfully and how
>>> many had to fall back to the existing implementation.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
>>
>> Hi Vlastimil,
>>
>> This patch increases kmod selftest (stress module loader) runtime by 
>> about
>> ~50-60%, from ~200s to ~300s total execution time. My tested kernel has
>> CONFIG_KVFREE_RCU_BATCHED enabled. Any idea or suggestions on what 
>> might be
>> causing this, or how to address it?
>>
> 
> I have been looking into a regression for Linux v6.18-rc where time 
> taken to run some internal graphics tests on our Tegra234 device has 
> increased from around 35% causing the tests to timeout. Bisect is 

I meant 'increased by around 35%'.

> pointing to this commit and I also see we have CONFIG_KVFREE_RCU_BATCHED=y.
> 
> I have not tried disabling CONFIG_KVFREE_RCU_BATCHED=y but I can. I am 
> not sure if there are any downsides to disabling this?
> 
> Thanks
> Jon
> 

-- 
nvpublic