Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] mm/vmalloc: remove vfree_atomic()
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
References: <20170330102719.13119-1-aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
 <20170330102719.13119-4-aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
 <20170330171845.GA19841@bombadil.infradead.org>
CC: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <hpa@zytor.com>, <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
        <hch@lst.de>, <mingo@elte.hu>, <jszhang@marvell.com>,
        <joelaf@google.com>, <joaodias@google.com>, <tglx@linutronix.de>
From: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
Message-ID: <c9a25b31-ff8e-94a5-cd39-fa6dc7b961b3@virtuozzo.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:27:28 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170330171845.GA19841@bombadil.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Mar 2017 18:27:22.0765 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR0801MB2062
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1028
Lines: 31

On 03/30/2017 08:18 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 01:27:19PM +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>> vfree() can be used in any atomic context and there is no
>> vfree_atomic() callers left, so let's remove it.
> 
> We might still get warnings though.
> 
>> @@ -1588,9 +1556,11 @@ void vfree(const void *addr)
>>  
>>  	if (!addr)
>>  		return;
>> -	if (unlikely(in_interrupt()))
>> -		__vfree_deferred(addr);
>> -	else
>> +	if (unlikely(in_interrupt())) {
>> +		struct vfree_deferred *p = this_cpu_ptr(&vfree_deferred);
>> +		if (llist_add((struct llist_node *)addr, &p->list))
>> +			schedule_work(&p->wq);
>> +	} else
>>  		__vunmap(addr, 1);
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(vfree);
> 
> If I disable preemption, then call vfree(), in_interrupt() will not be
> true (I've only incremented preempt_count()), then __vunmap() calls
> remove_vm_area() which calls might_sleep(), which will warn.

The first patch removed this might_sleep() .

> So I think this check needs to change from in_interrupt() to in_atomic().
>