[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708221316240.15775@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SLUB use cmpxchg_local
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Christoph Lameter (clameter@....com) wrote:
> > void *kmem_cache_alloc(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t gfpflags)
> > @@ -1577,7 +1590,10 @@ static void __slab_free(struct kmem_cach
> > {
> > void *prior;
> > void **object = (void *)x;
> > + unsigned long flags;
> >
> > + local_irq_save(flags);
> > + put_cpu_no_resched();
>
> Those two lines may skip a preempt_check.
Yes we cannot execute something else here.
> Could we change them to this instead ?
>
> put_cpu();
> local_irq_save(flags);
Then the thread could be preempted and rescheduled on a different cpu
between put_cpu and local_irq_save() which means that we loose the
state information of the kmem_cache_cpu structure.
> Otherwise, it would be good to call
>
> preempt_check_resched();
>
> After each local_irq_restore() in this function.
We could do that but maybe the frequency of these checks would be too
high? When should the resched checks be used?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists