[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200923115251.7cc63a7e@oasis.local.home>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 11:52:51 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: peterz@...radead.org
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
"open list\:SYNOPSYS ARC ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
linux-csky@...r.kernel.org, Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, Nick Hu <nickhu@...estech.com>,
Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>,
Vincent Chen <deanbo422@...il.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-sparc <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch RFC 00/15] mm/highmem: Provide a preemptible variant of
kmap_atomic & friends
On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 10:40:32 +0200
peterz@...radead.org wrote:
> However, with migrate_disable() we can have each task preempted in a
> migrate_disable() region, worse we can stack them all on the _same_ CPU
> (super ridiculous odds, sure). And then we end up only able to run one
> task, with the rest of the CPUs picking their nose.
What if we just made migrate_disable() a local_lock() available for !RT?
I mean make it a priority inheritance PER CPU lock.
That is, no two tasks could do a migrate_disable() on the same CPU? If
one task does a migrate_disable() and then gets preempted and the
preempting task does a migrate_disable() on the same CPU, it will block
and wait for the first task to do a migrate_enable().
No two tasks on the same CPU could enter the migrate_disable() section
simultaneously, just like no two tasks could enter a preempt_disable()
section.
In essence, we just allow local_lock() to be used for both RT and !RT.
Perhaps make migrate_disable() an anonymous local_lock()?
This should lower the SHC in theory, if you can't have stacked migrate
disables on the same CPU.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists