[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1804100907160.27333@nuc-kabylake>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:12:08 -0500 (CDT)
From: Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mm, slab: reschedule cache_reap() on the same CPU
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> cache_reap() is initially scheduled in start_cpu_timer() via
> schedule_delayed_work_on(). But then the next iterations are scheduled via
> schedule_delayed_work(), thus using WORK_CPU_UNBOUND.
That is a bug.. cache_reap must run on the same cpu since it deals with
the per cpu queues of the current cpu. Scheduled_delayed_work() used to
guarantee running on teh same cpu.
> This patch makes sure schedule_delayed_work_on() is used with the proper cpu
> when scheduling the next iteration. The cpu is stored with delayed_work on a
> new slab_reap_work_struct super-structure.
The current cpu is readily available via smp_processor_id(). Why a
super structure?
> @@ -4074,7 +4086,8 @@ static void cache_reap(struct work_struct *w)
> next_reap_node();
> out:
> /* Set up the next iteration */
> - schedule_delayed_work(work, round_jiffies_relative(REAPTIMEOUT_AC));
> + schedule_delayed_work_on(reap_work->cpu, work,
> + round_jiffies_relative(REAPTIMEOUT_AC));
schedule_delayed_work_on(smp_processor_id(), work, round_jiffies_relative(REAPTIMEOUT_AC));
instead all of the other changes?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists