Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
slub: do not assert not having lock in removing freed partial
Vladimir reported the following issue: Commit c65c187 ("slub: use lockdep_assert_held") requires remove_partial() to be called with n->list_lock held, but free_partial() called from kmem_cache_close() on cache destruction does not follow this rule, leading to a warning: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2787 at mm/slub.c:1536 __kmem_cache_shutdown+0x1b2/0x1f0() Modules linked in: CPU: 0 PID: 2787 Comm: modprobe Tainted: G W 3.14.0-rc1-mm1+ #1 Hardware name: 0000000000000600 ffff88003ae1dde8 ffffffff816d9583 0000000000000600 0000000000000000 ffff88003ae1de28 ffffffff8107c107 0000000000000000 ffff880037ab2b00 ffff88007c240d30 ffffea0001ee5280 ffffea0001ee52a0 Call Trace: __kmem_cache_shutdown+0x1b2/0x1f0 kmem_cache_destroy+0x43/0xf0 xfs_destroy_zones+0x103/0x110 [xfs] exit_xfs_fs+0x38/0x4e4 [xfs] SyS_delete_module+0x19a/0x1f0 system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b His solution was to add a spinlock in order to quiet lockdep. Although there would be no contention to adding the lock, that lock also requires disabling of interrupts which will have a larger impact on the system. Instead of adding a spinlock to a location where it is not needed for lockdep, make a __remove_partial() function that does not test if the list_lock is held, as no one should have it due to it being freed. Also added a __add_partial() function that does not do the lock validation either, as it is not needed for the creation of the cache. Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> Reported-by: Vladimir Davydov <[email protected]> Suggested-by: David Rientjes <[email protected]> Acked-by: David Rientjes <[email protected]> Acked-by: Vladimir Davydov <[email protected]> Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> Cc: Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Loading branch information