[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1218108434.6086.29.camel@lts-notebook>
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 07:27:14 -0400
From: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Race condition between putback_lru_page and
mem_cgroup_move_list
On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 20:00 +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> Hi
>
> > If you mean the "active/inactive list transition" in
> > shrink_[in]active_list(), these are already batched under zone lru_lock
> > with batch size determined by the 'release pages' pvec. So, I think
> > we're OK here.
>
> No.
>
> AFAIK shrink_inactive_list batched zone->lru_lock,
> but it doesn't batched mz->lru_lock.
>
> then, spin_lock_irqsave is freqently called.
Ah, I see what you mean. Yes, the mem cgroup zone lru_lock will be
cycled frequently as each back of pages is put back during reclaim. So,
you'd like to eliminate the mz lru_lock, move the mem cgroup zone info
under the corresponding zone lru_lock and move the page between memcg
lists atomically with adding to global lru lists?
Lee
--
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