[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090608160525.86f38739.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 16:05:25 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: steiner@....com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch 02/12] GRU - add user request to explicitly unload a gru
context
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 12:16:50 -0500
steiner@....com wrote:
> /*
> + * Free all kernel contexts that are not currently in use.
> + * Returns 0 if all freed, else number of inuse context.
> + */
> +static int gru_free_kernel_contexts(void)
> +{
> + struct gru_blade_state *bs;
> + struct gru_thread_state *kgts;
> + int bid, ret = 0;
> +
> + for (bid = 0; bid < GRU_MAX_BLADES; bid++) {
> + bs = gru_base[bid];
> + if (!bs)
> + continue;
> + if (down_write_trylock(&bs->bs_kgts_sema)) {
trylocks are always lame - they add a rarely-executed code path where
bugs can lurk. They're often an admission that the locking is screwed
up.
I don't know if the latter is true here, but it would be helpful to add
a comment explaining what's going on, and why this unusual and
troublesome locking primitive is being used.
> + kgts = bs->bs_kgts;
> + if (kgts && kgts->ts_gru)
> + gru_unload_context(kgts, 0);
> + kfree(kgts);
> + bs->bs_kgts = NULL;
> + up_write(&bs->bs_kgts_sema);
nit: the kfree() can be moved outside the locked region.
> + } else {
> + ret++;
> + }
> + }
> + return ret;
> +}
--
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