mirror of
https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git
synced 2026-05-27 16:44:58 +02:00
mm/slub: hold cpus_read_lock around flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()
flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache() calls queue_work_on() in a
for_each_online_cpu() loop, which requires the cpu to stay online.
But cpus_read_lock() is not held in kvfree_rcu_barrier_on_cache() and the
set of "online cpus" is subject to change.
There are two paths that call flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache():
// has cpus_read_lock()
flush_all_rcu_sheaves()
-> flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()
// no cpus_read_lock()
kvfree_rcu_barrier_on_cache()
-> flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()
Fix this by holding cpus_read_lock() in kvfree_rcu_barrier_on_cache().
Why not move cpus_read_lock() from flush_all_rcu_sheaves() into
flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()? The reason is it would introduce a new lock
order (slab_mutex -> cpu_hotplug_lock). The reverse order
(cpu_hotplug_lock -> slab_mutex) is established by
- cpuhp_setup_state_nocalls(..., slub_cpu_setup, ...)
- kmem_cache_destroy()
The two orders together would form an AB-BA deadlock.
Finally, add lockdep_assert_cpus_held() in flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache()
to catch the same problem in the future.
Fixes: 0f35040de5 ("mm/slab: introduce kvfree_rcu_barrier_on_cache() for cache destruction")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Qing Wang <wangqing7171@gmail.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260512035035.762317-1-wangqing7171@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) <vbabka@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
5b31044e64
commit
67ea9d353d
|
|
@ -2110,7 +2110,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvfree_rcu_barrier);
|
|||
void kvfree_rcu_barrier_on_cache(struct kmem_cache *s)
|
||||
{
|
||||
if (cache_has_sheaves(s)) {
|
||||
cpus_read_lock();
|
||||
flush_rcu_sheaves_on_cache(s);
|
||||
cpus_read_unlock();
|
||||
rcu_barrier();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user