[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANN689Eu72s1FTCfgXp8NZJ80jj9-pUNdj6gw4OKZPa1pR5+jg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 17:51:47 -0700
From: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Liam Howlett <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Ying Han <yinghan@...gle.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/10] mmap locking API: convert nested write lock sites
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 12:33 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 05:43:49PM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> > @@ -47,7 +48,7 @@ static inline void activate_mm(struct mm_struct *old, struct mm_struct *new)
> > * when the new ->mm is used for the first time.
> > */
> > __switch_mm(&new->context.id);
> > - down_write_nested(&new->mmap_sem, 1);
> > + mmap_write_lock_nested(new, 1);
>
> This should have already been using SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING. 1 is
> uninformative.
Sure, I can change that.
Note, all mmap_write_lock_nested call sites use single depth nesting,
so I'm not entirely sure if the argument should be passed to
mmap_write_lock_nested in the first place ?
--
Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists