[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cf420c0c0e64d9ee9681bf81d3dd84a2a048e2db.camel@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2021 06:38:33 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 12/34] mm, slub: move disabling/enabling irqs to
___slab_alloc()
Greetings,
On Wed, 2021-06-09 at 13:38 +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> @@ -3313,6 +3320,8 @@ int kmem_cache_alloc_bulk(struct kmem_cache *s,
> gfp_t flags, size_t size,
> */
> c->tid = next_tid(c->tid);
>
> + local_irq_enable();
> +
> /*
> * Invoking slow path likely have side-effect
> * of re-populating per CPU c->freelist
This addition should have been followed by removal of the one in the
error path. At the end of the series, RT ends up doing a double
local_unlock_irq() instead of post ___slab_alloc() slub_put_cpu_ptr().
-Mike
Powered by blists - more mailing lists