[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201001182156.26878.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:56:26 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Force GFP_NOIO during suspend/resume (was: Re: [linux-pm] Memory allocations in .suspend became very unreliable)
On Monday 18 January 2010, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Montag, 18. Januar 2010 00:00:23 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> > On Sunday 17 January 2010, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2010-01-17 at 14:27 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > ...
> > > However, it's hard to deal with the case of allocations that have
> > > already started waiting for IOs. It might be possible to have some VM
> > > hook to make them wakeup, re-evaluate the situation and get out of that
> > > code path but in any case it would be tricky.
> >
> > In the second version of the patch I used an rwsem that made us wait for these
> > allocations to complete before we changed gfp_allowed_mask.
>
> This will be a very, very hot semaphore. What's the impact on performance?
rwsems are highly optimized AFAICT, but this is a good question of course.
I have no data at the moment.
Rafael
--
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