Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm/vmalloc: Add a safer version of find_vm_area() for debug

[Joel Fernandes]

On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 11:23:40AM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 08:11:48AM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
[..]
> > Anyway, so TL;DR:-
> > 
> > 1. As we both agree, add a comment to explain why you need the spin trylock.
> > (there are no further steps :P)
> > 
> > And I don't believe this actually needs any further changes after this
> > discussion*, so if you fancy doing a follow up to that effect that will
> > suffice for me thanks!

Thanks.

> For PREEMPT_RT kernels we are not allowed to use "vmap parts" in non
> slepable context, this is just reality, because we use a sleep type of
> spinlock.
> 
> I am not sure how urgent we need this fix. But to me it looks like
> debuging and corner case. Probably i am wrong and miss something.
> But if it is correct, i would just bailout for RT kernel and rework
> later in a more proper way. For example implement a safe way of RCU
> scan but this is also another story.

Bailing out for RT kernel is insufficient, as we need the trylock() to avoid
self-deadlock as well for !PREEMPT_RT. Plus IIRC in the past there was a
opposition to special-casing PREEMPT_RT in code as well. Admittedly those
PREEMPT_RT cases were related to detecting preempt-disabled than a lock-held
section though.

We could optionally do a trylock() loop + bail out after certain number of
tries as well but that would compilicate the code a bit more and I am not
sure if it is worth it. Still if you guys feel strongly about doing something
like that, let me know and I can give it a try :).

thanks,

 - Joel