[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1208221414450.2114@eggly.anvils>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 14:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/36] autonuma: memory follows CPU algorithm and
task/mm_autonuma stats collection
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com> writes:
> > + /*
> > + * Take the lock with irqs disabled to avoid a lock
> > + * inversion with the lru_lock. The lru_lock is taken
> > + * before the autonuma_migrate_lock in
> > + * split_huge_page. If we didn't disable irqs, the
> > + * lru_lock could be taken by interrupts after we have
> > + * obtained the autonuma_migrate_lock here.
> > + */
>
> Which interrupt code takes the lru_lock? That sounds like a bug.
Not a bug: the clearest example is end_page_writeback() calling
rotate_reclaimable_page(); but I think once you probe deeper, you
find some other mm/swap.c pagevec operations which may get called
from interrupt, and end up freeing unrelated PageLRU pages.
Hugh
--
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