Re: [PATCH 13/13] rcu/kvfree: Eliminate k[v]free_rcu() single argument macro
From: Joel Fernandes
Date: Mon Mar 06 2023 - 09:50:35 EST
On Sun, Mar 05, 2023 at 10:05:24AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2023 at 07:56:33AM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 5, 2023, at 6:41 AM, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >>>> On Mar 5, 2023, at 5:29 AM, Joel Fernandes <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi, All,
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 10:11 AM Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
> > >>>> <urezki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> For a single argument invocations a new kfree_rcu_mightsleep()
> > >>>> and kvfree_rcu_mightsleep() macroses are used. This is done in
> > >>>> order to prevent users from calling a single argument from
> > >>>> atomic contexts as "_mightsleep" prefix signals that it can
> > >>>> schedule().
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Since this commit in -dev branch [1] suggests more users still need
> > >>> conversion, let us drop this single patch for 6.4 and move the rest of
> > >>> the series forward? Let me know if you disagree.
> > >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git/commit/?h=dev&id=9bf5e3a2626ed474d080f695007541b6ecd6e60b
> > >>>
> > >>> All -- please supply Ack/Review tags for patches 1-12.
> > >>
> > >> Or put another way, what is the transition plan for these remaining users?
> > >>
> > >> I am getting on a plane right now but I can research which users are remaining later.
> > >>
> > > I am not sure. I think we can cover it on the meeting.
> >
> > Cool, thanks.
>
> My current plan is as follows:
>
> 1. Addition of kvfree_rcu_mightsleep() went into v6.3.
>
> 2. After creating branches, I send out the series, including 12/12.
> The -rcu tree's "dev" branch continues to have a revert to avoid
> breaking -next until we achieve clean -next and clean "dev"
> branch.
>
> 3. Any conversion patches that get maintainer acks go into v6.4.
> Along with a checkpatch error, as Joel notes below.
>
> 4. There are periodic checks for new code using the single-argument
> forms of kfree_rcu() and kvfree_rcu(). Patches are produced
> for them, or responses to the patches introducing them, as
> appropriate. A coccinelle script might be helpful, perhaps
> even as part of kernel test robot or similar.
>
> 5. The -rcu tree's "dev" branch will revert to unclean from time
> to time as maintainers choose to take conversion patches into
> their own trees.
>
> 6. Once mainline is clean, we push 12/12 into the next merge
> window.
Since in theory, mainline could also be after 6.4-rc1, I am assuming next merge
window could also mean 6.5 right? But yes, agreed.
> 7. We then evaluate whether further cleanups are needed.
>
> > > My feeling is
> > > that, we introduced "_mightsleep" macros first and after that try to
> > > convert users.
>
> > One stopgap could be to add a checkpatch error if anyone tries to use old API,
> > and then in the meanwhile convert all users.
> > Though, that requires people listening to checkpatch complaints.
>
> Every person who listens is that much less hassle. It doesn't have to
> be perfect. ;-)
The below checkpatch change can catch at least simple single-arg uses (i.e.
not having compound expressions inside of k[v]free_rcu() args). I will submit
a proper patch to it which we can include in this set.
Thoughts?
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 9 +++++++++
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 78cc595b98ce..fc73786064b3 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -6362,6 +6362,15 @@ sub process {
}
}
+# check for soon-to-be-deprecated single-argument k[v]free_rcu() API
+ if ($line =~ /\bk[v]?free_rcu\s*\([^(]+\)/) {
+ if ($line =~ /\bk[v]?free_rcu\s*\([^,]+\)/) {
+ ERROR("DEPRECATED_API",
+ "Single-argument k[v]free_rcu() API is deprecated, please pass an rcu_head object." . $herecurr);
+ }
+ }
+
+
# check for unnecessary "Out of Memory" messages
if ($line =~ /^\+.*\b$logFunctions\s*\(/ &&
$prevline =~ /^[ \+]\s*if\s*\(\s*(\!\s*|NULL\s*==\s*)?($Lval)(\s*==\s*NULL\s*)?\s*\)/ &&
--
2.40.0.rc0.216.gc4246ad0f0-goog