drivers/infiniband/core/restrack.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
From: tuqiang <tu.qiang35@zte.com.cn>
The MR/QP restrack also needs to be released when delete it, otherwise it
cause memory leak as the task struct won't be released.
This problem has been fixed by the commit <dac153f2802d>
("RDMA/restrack: Release MR restrack when delete"), but still exists in the
linux-5.10.y branch.
Fixes: 13ef5539def7 ("RDMA/restrack: Count references to the verbs objects")
Signed-off-by: tuqiang <tu.qiang35@zte.com.cn>
Signed-off-by: Jiang Kun <jiang.kun2@zte.com.cn>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: xu xin <xu.xin16@zte.com.cn>
Cc: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
---
drivers/infiniband/core/restrack.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/restrack.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/restrack.c
index bbbbec5b1593..d5a69c4a1891 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/core/restrack.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/restrack.c
@@ -326,8 +326,6 @@ void rdma_restrack_del(struct rdma_restrack_entry *res)
rt = &dev->res[res->type];
old = xa_erase(&rt->xa, res->id);
- if (res->type == RDMA_RESTRACK_MR || res->type == RDMA_RESTRACK_QP)
- return;
WARN_ON(old != res);
res->valid = false;
--
2.18.4
On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 05:57:48PM +0800, jiang.kun2@zte.com.cn wrote: > From: tuqiang <tu.qiang35@zte.com.cn> > > The MR/QP restrack also needs to be released when delete it, otherwise it > cause memory leak as the task struct won't be released. > > This problem has been fixed by the commit <dac153f2802d> > ("RDMA/restrack: Release MR restrack when delete"), but still exists in the > linux-5.10.y branch. Why don't we just take the correct fix? Why is this needed instead? thanks, greg k-h
> >On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 05:57:48PM +0800, jiang.kun2@zte.com.cn wrote: >> From: tuqiang <tu.qiang35@zte.com.cn> >> >> The MR/QP restrack also needs to be released when delete it, otherwise it >> cause memory leak as the task struct won't be released. >> >> This problem has been fixed by the commit <dac153f2802d> >> ("RDMA/restrack: Release MR restrack when delete"), but still exists in the >> linux-5.10.y branch. > >Why don't we just take the correct fix? Why is this needed instead? 1. Reply: Why don't we just take the correct fix? ========================================= Due to inconsistent code context, it is not possible to directly cherry-pick the changes to the linux-5.10 branch. The commit 514aee660df4 (RDMA: Globally allocate and release QP memory) resolved the resource release issue for QP, but the MR issue remains unresolved. 2. Reply: Why is this needed instead? ================================== When a user applies for resources by executing MR/QP-related commands, they will reference the task_struct object. However, when consuming the object, rdma_restrack_del does not have the corresponding release mechanism. Stack: 0xffffffffb70df1d0 : get_task_struct+0x0/0x50 [kernel] 0xffffffffc5b3a42c : rdma_restrack_attach_task.isra.6+0x2c/0x50 [ib_core] 0xffffffffc748fd54 : ib_uverbs_reg_mr+0x194/0x260 [ib_uverbs] 0xffffffffc749a049 : ib_uverbs_handler_UVERBS_METHOD_INVOKE_WRITE+0xb9/0x110 [ib_uverbs] 0xffffffffc7496a1f : ib_uverbs_run_method+0x6ff/0x7b0 [ib_uverbs] 0xffffffffc7496c65 : ib_uverbs_cmd_verbs+0x195/0x360 [ib_uverbs] 0xffffffffc7496ec3 : ib_uverbs_ioctl+0x93/0xe0 [ib_uverbs] 0xffffffffb736bbe9 : __x64_sys_ioctl+0x89/0xc0 [kernel] 0xffffffffb7a62a10 : do_syscall_64+0x30/0x40 [kernel] 0xffffffffb70df1d0 : get_task_struct+0x0/0x50 [kernel] 0xffffffffc5b3a42c : rdma_restrack_attach_task.isra.6+0x2c/0x50 [ib_core] 0xffffffffc749bfea : ib_uverbs_handler_UVERBS_METHOD_QP_CREATE+0xaba/0xb40 [ib_uverbs] 0xffffffffc7496a1f : ib_uverbs_run_method+0x6ff/0x7b0 [ib_uverbs] 0xffffffffc7496c65 : ib_uverbs_cmd_verbs+0x195/0x360 [ib_uverbs] 0xffffffffc7496ec3 : ib_uverbs_ioctl+0x93/0xe0 [ib_uverbs] 0xffffffffb736bbe9 : __x64_sys_ioctl+0x89/0xc0 [kernel] 0xffffffffb7a62a10 : do_syscall_64+0x30/0x40 [kernel] > >thanks, > >greg k-h
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.