[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMZfGtVjrMC1+fm6JjQfwFHeZN3dcddaAogZsHFEtL4HJyhYUw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2021 10:44:41 +0800
From: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Cc: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, Jue Wang <juew@...gle.com>,
Yang Yao <ygyao@...gle.com>, Joanna Li <joannali@...gle.com>,
Cannon Matthews <cannonmatthews@...gle.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] hugetlb: Add hugetlb.*.numa_stat file
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 7:36 AM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] hugetlb: Add hugetlb.*.numa_stat file
>
> To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>, Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, Jue Wang <juew@...gle.com>, Yang Yao <ygyao@...gle.com>, Joanna Li <joannali@...gle.com>, Cannon Matthews <cannonmatthews@...gle.com>, Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
>
> Bcc:
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=# Don't remove this line #=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> On 11/10/21 6:36 PM, Muchun Song wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 9:50 AM Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> +struct hugetlb_cgroup_per_node {
>
> >> + /* hugetlb usage in pages over all hstates. */
>
> >> + atomic_long_t usage[HUGE_MAX_HSTATE];
>
> >
>
> > Why do you use atomic? IIUC, 'usage' is always
>
> > increased/decreased under hugetlb_lock except
>
> > hugetlb_cgroup_read_numa_stat() which is always
>
> > reading it. So I think WRITE_ONCE/READ_ONCE
>
> > is enough.
>
>
>
> Thanks for continuing to work this, I was traveling and unable to
>
> comment.
Have a good time.
>
>
>
> Unless I am missing something, I do not see a reason for WRITE_ONCE/READ_ONCE
Because __hugetlb_cgroup_commit_charge and
hugetlb_cgroup_read_numa_stat can run parallely,
which meets the definition of data race. I believe
KCSAN could report this race. I'm not strongly
suggest using WRITE/READ_ONCE() here. But
in theory it should be like this. Right?
Thanks.
>
> and would suggest going back to the way this code was in v5.
>
> --
>
> Mike Kravetz
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists