[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <796ac33b-26cc-107b-debe-17b5cfceab97@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 07:55:37 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
BjörnTöpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
magnus.karlsson@...el.com, eugenia@...lanox.com,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>, galp@...lanox.com,
Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@...earbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [bpf-next V5 PATCH 11/15] page_pool: refurbish version of
page_pool code
On 03/23/2018 07:15 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 06:29:55 -0700
> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> On 03/23/2018 05:18 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>>
>>> +
>>> +void page_pool_destroy_rcu(struct page_pool *pool)
>>> +{
>>> + call_rcu(&pool->rcu, __page_pool_destroy_rcu);
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_pool_destroy_rcu);
>>>
>>
>>
>> Why do we need to respect one rcu grace period before destroying a page pool ?
>
> Due to previous allocator ID patch, which can have a pointer reference
> to a page_pool, and the allocator ID lookup uses RCU.
>
I am not convinced. How comes a patch that is _before_ this one can have any impact ?
Normally, we put first infrastructure, then something using it.
rcu grace period before freeing huge quantitites of pages is problematic and could
be used by syzbot to OOM the host.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists