[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200813191347.GV9477@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 21:13:47 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: peterz@...radead.org
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, RCU <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"Theodore Y . Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...ymobile.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC-PATCH 1/2] mm: Add __GFP_NO_LOCKS flag
On Thu 13-08-20 20:31:21, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 09:29:04AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
[...]
> > 3. Reusing existing GFP_ flags/values/whatever to communicate
> > the raw-context information that was to be communicated by
> > the new GFP_ flag.
> >
> > 4. Making lockdep forgive acquiring spinlocks while holding
> > raw spinlocks, but only in CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y kernels.
> >
> > Am I missing anything?
>
> How would 4 solve anything?
Nothing on its own but along with http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200813075027.GD9477@dhcp22.suse.cz
it would allow at least _some_ NOWAIT semantic for RT atomic contexts
and prevent from lockdep false positives for !RT trees.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists