[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150728134712.GB19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:47:12 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Pintu Kumar <pintu.k@...sung.com>,
Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...wei.com>, Gioh Kim <gioh.kim@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary updating of GFP
flags during normal operation
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 03:36:05PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >+static inline gfp_t gfp_allowed_mask(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> >+{
> >+ if (static_key_false(&gfp_restricted_key))
>
> This is where it uses static_key_false()...
> >+struct static_key gfp_restricted_key __read_mostly = STATIC_KEY_INIT_TRUE;
>
> ... and here it's combined with STATIC_KEY_INIT_TRUE. I've suspected that
> this is not allowed, which Peter confirmed on IRC.
>
> It's however true that the big comment at the top of
> include/linux/jump_label.h only explicitly talks about combining
> static_key_false() and static_key_true().
>
> I'm not sure what's the correct idiom for a default-false static key which
> however has to start as true on boot (Peter said such cases do exist)...
There currently isn't one. But see the patchset I just send to address
this:
lkml.kernel.org/r/20150728132313.164884020@...radead.org
--
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