[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMZfGtWg0J5syATXMpP8RYOz=w0gJNYz_=UrT3ueMspQjNY7BQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 11:11:41 +0800
From: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] mm: hugetlb: add return -EAGAIN for dissolve_free_huge_page
On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 1:07 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed 06-01-21 16:47:37, Muchun Song wrote:
> > When dissolve_free_huge_page() races with __free_huge_page(), we can
> > do a retry. Because the race window is small.
>
> Is this a bug fix or mere optimization. I have hard time to tell from
> the description.
It is optimization. Thanks.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
> > ---
> > mm/hugetlb.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> [...]
> > @@ -1825,6 +1828,14 @@ int dissolve_free_huge_page(struct page *page)
> > }
> > out:
> > spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If the freeing of the HugeTLB page is put on a work queue, we should
> > + * flush the work before retrying.
> > + */
> > + if (unlikely(rc == -EAGAIN))
> > + flush_work(&free_hpage_work);
>
> Is it safe to wait for the work to finish from this context?
Yes. It is safe.
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists