On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 02:33:16PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote: > On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 08:48:46PM +0000, Peilin Ye wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 01:16:06PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > > Generally memcg charging is allowed from all the contexts including NMI > > > where even spinning on spinlock can cause locking issues. However one > > > call chain was missed during the addition of memcg charging from any > > > context support. That is try_charge_memcg() -> memcg_memory_event() -> > > > cgroup_file_notify(). > > > > > > The possible function call tree under cgroup_file_notify() can acquire > > > many different spin locks in spinning mode. Some of them are > > > cgroup_file_kn_lock, kernfs_notify_lock, pool_workqeue's lock. So, let's > > > just skip cgroup_file_notify() from memcg charging if the context does > > > not allow spinning. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Tested-by: Peilin Ye <yepeilin@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Thanks Peilin. When you post the official patch for __GFP_HIGH in > __bpf_async_init(), please add a comment on why __GFP_HIGH is used > instead of GFP_ATOMIC. Got it! I'll schedule to have that done today. Thanks, Peilin Ye
