[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260115033237.1545400-1-kuba@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2026 19:32:37 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: fushuai.wang@...ux.dev
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
andrew+netdev@...n.ch,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
edumazet@...gle.com,
pabeni@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net,
vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev,
Jason@...c4.com,
wireguard@...ts.zx2c4.com,
wangfushuai@...du.com
Subject: Re: [net-next,v3] wireguard: allowedips: Use kfree_rcu() instead of call_rcu()
This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least pausible.
For local reproduction steps see https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html
---
wireguard: allowedips: Use kfree_rcu() instead of call_rcu()
This commit replaces call_rcu() with a custom kmem_cache_free() callback
with kfree_rcu() to simplify the code. The change affects how nodes are
freed in the remove_node() function.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireguard/allowedips.c b/drivers/net/wireguard/allowedips.c
> index 09f7fcd7da78..5ece9acad64d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireguard/allowedips.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireguard/allowedips.c
> @@ -48,11 +48,6 @@ static void push_rcu(struct allowedips_node **stack,
> }
> }
>
> -static void node_free_rcu(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> -{
> - kmem_cache_free(node_cache, container_of(rcu, struct allowedips_node, rcu));
> -}
> -
[ ... ]
> @@ -271,13 +266,13 @@ static void remove_node(struct allowedips_node *node, struct mutex *lock)
> if (free_parent)
> child = rcu_dereference_protected(parent->bit[!(node->parent_bit_packed & 1)],
> lockdep_is_held(lock));
> - call_rcu(&node->rcu, node_free_rcu);
> + kfree_rcu(node, rcu);
Does wg_allowedips_slab_uninit() need to be updated to use
kvfree_rcu_barrier() instead of rcu_barrier()?
When CONFIG_KVFREE_RCU_BATCHED is enabled (the default), kfree_rcu()
uses a batched mechanism that queues work via queue_rcu_work(). The
rcu_barrier() call waits for RCU callbacks to complete, but these
callbacks only queue the actual free to a workqueue via rcu_work_rcufn().
The workqueue work that calls kvfree() may still be pending after
rcu_barrier() returns.
The existing cleanup path is:
wg_allowedips_slab_uninit() -> rcu_barrier() -> kmem_cache_destroy()
With kfree_rcu(), this sequence could destroy the slab cache while
kfree_rcu_work() still has pending frees queued. The proper barrier for
kfree_rcu() is kvfree_rcu_barrier() which also calls flush_rcu_work()
on all pending batches.
> if (!free_parent)
> return;
> if (child)
> child->parent_bit_packed = parent->parent_bit_packed;
> *(struct allowedips_node **)(parent->parent_bit_packed & ~3UL) = child;
> - call_rcu(&parent->rcu, node_free_rcu);
> + kfree_rcu(parent, rcu);
> }
--
pw-bot: cr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists