[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <hfutmuh4g5jtmrgeemq2aqr2tvxz6mnqaxo5l5vddqnjasyagi@gcscu5khrjxm>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 22:32:52 -0800
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
To: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>
Cc: Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@...ux.dev>, hannes@...xchg.org, hughd@...gle.com,
mhocko@...e.com, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, muchun.song@...ux.dev,
david@...hat.com, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, ziy@...dia.com,
imran.f.khan@...cle.com, kamalesh.babulal@...cle.com, axelrasmussen@...gle.com,
yuanchu@...gle.com, weixugc@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>, Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, Clark Williams <clrkwllms@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 04/26] mm: vmscan: refactor move_folios_to_lru()
On Fri, Nov 07, 2025 at 10:20:57PM +0900, Harry Yoo wrote:
>
> Although it's mentioned in the locking documentation, I'm afraid that
> local_lock is not the right interface to use here. Preemption will be
> disabled anyway (on both PREEMPT_RT and !PREEMPT_RT) when the stats are
> updated (in __mod_node_page_state()).
>
> Here we just want to disable IRQ only on !PREEMPT_RT (to update
> the stats safely).
I don't think there is a need to disable IRQs. There are three stats
update functions called in that hunk.
1) __mod_lruvec_state
2) __count_vm_events
3) count_memcg_events
count_memcg_events() can be called with IRQs. __count_vm_events can be
replaced with count_vm_events. For __mod_lruvec_state, the
__mod_node_page_state() inside needs preemption disabled.
Easy way would be to just disable/enable preemption instead of IRQs.
Otherwise go a bit more fine-grained approach i.e. replace
__count_vm_events with count_vm_events and just disable preemption
across __mod_node_page_state().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists