From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
To: Dmitry Antipov <dmantipov@yandex.ru>
Cc: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
linux-can@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: gw: prefer kfree_rcu() over call_rcu() with cgw_job_free_rcu()
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 15:04:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANn89iKGayUU2cg+ibQeEqWhw-mD+b4x_k+fm7xjis52f8q82g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12d61b93-fd89-4557-8c0f-2a72437ded6f@yandex.ru>
On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 3:01 PM Dmitry Antipov <dmantipov@yandex.ru> wrote:
>
> On 3/13/24 13:55, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> > kmem_cache_free(struct kmem_cache *s, void *x) has additional checks
> > to make sure the object @x was allocated
> > from the @s kmem_cache.
> >
> > Look for SLAB_CONSISTENCY_CHECKS and CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_HARDENED
>
> Yes. Using kfree_rcu() bypasses these (optional) debugging/consistency
> checks.
>
> > Your patch is not 'trivial' as you think.
>
> You're shifting from "not going to work" to "not trivial" so nicely.
You used the word "trivial" in the changelog, not me.
>
> > Otherwise, we will soon have dozen of patches submissions replacing
> > kmem_cache_free() with kfree()
>
> No. The question is about freeing on some (where the freeing callback
> function is trivial) RCU-protected paths only.
>
I am saying no to this patch.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-13 14:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-13 9:42 [PATCH] can: gw: prefer kfree_rcu() over call_rcu() with cgw_job_free_rcu() Dmitry Antipov
2024-03-13 10:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-03-13 10:28 ` Dmitry Antipov
2024-03-13 10:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-03-13 14:01 ` Dmitry Antipov
2024-03-13 14:04 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CANn89iKGayUU2cg+ibQeEqWhw-mD+b4x_k+fm7xjis52f8q82g@mail.gmail.com \
--to=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=dmantipov@yandex.ru \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).