[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1508121714290.19264@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 17:16:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm, page_alloc: Remove unnecessary taking of a
seqlock when cpusets are disabled
On Wed, 12 Aug 2015, Mel Gorman wrote:
> There is a seqcounter that protects against spurious allocation failures
> when a task is changing the allowed nodes in a cpuset. There is no need
> to check the seqcounter until a cpuset exists.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
> Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
> ---
> include/linux/cpuset.h | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuset.h b/include/linux/cpuset.h
> index 1b357997cac5..6eb27cb480b7 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cpuset.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpuset.h
> @@ -104,6 +104,9 @@ extern void cpuset_print_task_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *p);
> */
> static inline unsigned int read_mems_allowed_begin(void)
> {
> + if (!cpusets_enabled())
> + return 0;
> +
> return read_seqcount_begin(¤t->mems_allowed_seq);
> }
>
> @@ -115,6 +118,9 @@ static inline unsigned int read_mems_allowed_begin(void)
> */
> static inline bool read_mems_allowed_retry(unsigned int seq)
> {
> + if (!cpusets_enabled())
> + return false;
> +
> return read_seqcount_retry(¤t->mems_allowed_seq, seq);
> }
>
This patch is an obvious improvement, but I think it's also possible to
change this to be
if (nr_cpusets() <= 1)
return false;
and likewise in the existing cpusets_enabled() check in
get_page_from_freelist(). A root cpuset may not exclude mems on the
system so, even if mounted, there's no need to check or be worried about
concurrent change when there is only one cpuset.
--
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