[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <ad5ed13a-172d-4e13-b09f-0d04e3896eeb@www.fastmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 07:06:24 -0700
From: "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@...nel.org>
To: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "Nicholas Piggin" <npiggin@...il.com>,
"Rik van Riel" <riel@...riel.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org,
"Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] sched: Use lightweight hazard pointers to grab lazy mms
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021, at 2:13 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 11:08:03AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > +static void mmdrop_lazy(struct rq *rq)
> > +{
> > + struct mm_struct *old_mm;
> > +
> > + if (likely(!READ_ONCE(rq->drop_mm)))
> > + return;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Slow path. This only happens when we recently stopped using
> > + * an mm that is exiting.
> > + */
> > + old_mm = xchg(&rq->drop_mm, NULL);
> > + if (old_mm)
> > + mmdrop(old_mm);
> > +}
>
> AFAICT if we observe a !NULL value on the load, the xchg() *MUST* also
> see !NULL (although it might see a different !NULL value). So do we want
> to write it something like so instead?
Like so?
>
> static void mmdrop_lazy(struct rq *rq)
> {
> struct mm_struct *old_mm;
>
> if (likely(!READ_ONCE(rq->drop_mm)))
> return;
>
> /*
> * Slow path. This only happens when we recently stopped using
> * an mm that is exiting.
* This xchg is the only thing that can change rq->drop_mm from non-NULL to NULL, and
* multiple mmdrop_lazy() calls can't run concurrently on the same CPU.
> */
> old_mm = xchg(&rq->drop_mm, NULL);
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!old_mm))
> return;
>
> mmdrop(old_mm);
> }
>
--Andy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists