[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m2fwq718u4.fsf@firstfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 09:57:39 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]mmap: avoid unnecessary anon_vma lock
Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com> writes:
> If we only change vma->vm_end, we can avoid taking anon_vma lock even 'insert'
> isn't NULL, which is the case of split_vma.
> From my understanding, we need the lock before because rmap must get the
> 'insert' VMA when we adjust old VMA's vm_end (the 'insert' VMA is linked to
> anon_vma list in __insert_vm_struct before).
> But now this isn't true any more. The 'insert' VMA is already linked to
> anon_vma list in __split_vma(with anon_vma_clone()) instead of
> __insert_vm_struct. There is no race rmap can't get required VMAs.
> So the anon_vma lock is unnecessary, and this can reduce one locking in brk
> case and improve scalability.
Looks good to me.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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