On Wed 17-06-20 05:23:21, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 01:31:57PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 17-06-20 04:08:20, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > If you call vfree() under
> > > a spinlock, you're in trouble. in_atomic() only knows
On Wed 17-06-20 04:08:20, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 09:12:12AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 16-06-20 17:37:11, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > Not just performance critical, but correctness critical. Since kvfree()
> > > may allocate from the
locate from the vmalloc allocator, I really think that kvfree()
> should assert that it's !in_atomic(). Otherwise we can get into trouble
> if we end up calling vfree() and have to take the mutex.
FWIW __vfree already checks for atomic context and put the work into a
deferred context. So this should be safe. It should be used as a last
resort, though.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
;slab: introduce kzfree()")
> Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long
Acked-by: Michal Hocko
Although I am not really sure this is a stable material. Is there any
known instance where the memset was optimized out from kzfree?
> ---
> mm/slab_common.c | 2
From: Michal Hocko
__GFP_REPEAT has a rather weak semantic but since it has been introduced
around 2.6.12 it has been ignored for low order allocations.
lzo_init uses __GFP_REPEAT to allocate LZO1X_MEM_COMPRESS 16K. This is
order 3 allocation request and __GFP_REPEAT is ignored for this size
as
