[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e9744c08-8384-70d1-26bc-d7e73e88ded2@suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:34:28 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux-RT-Users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] mm/page_alloc: Convert per-cpu list protection to
local_lock
On 4/22/21 1:14 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> There is a lack of clarity of what exactly local_irq_save/local_irq_restore
> protects in page_alloc.c . It conflates the protection of per-cpu page
> allocation structures with per-cpu vmstat deltas.
>
> This patch protects the PCP structure using local_lock which for most
> configurations is identical to IRQ enabling/disabling. The scope of the
> lock is still wider than it should be but this is decreased later.
>
> It is possible for the local_lock to be embedded safely within struct
> per_cpu_pages but it adds complexity to free_unref_page_list.
>
> [lkp@...el.com: Make pagesets static]
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists