On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:30:38 +0000 Mel Gorman <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> As suggested by Vlastimil Babka and Tejun Heo, this patch uses a static
> work_struct to co-ordinate the draining of per-cpu pages on the workqueue.
> Only one task can drain at a time but this is better than the previous
> scheme that allowed multiple tasks to send IPIs at a time.
> 
> One consideration is whether parallel requests should synchronise against
> each other. This patch does not synchronise for a global drain as the common
> case for such callers is expected to be multiple parallel direct reclaimers
> competing for pages when the watermark is close to min. Draining the per-cpu
> list is unlikely to make much progress and serialising the drain is of
> dubious merit. Drains are synchonrised for callers such as memory hotplug
> and CMA that care about the drain being complete when the function returns.
> 
> ...
>
> @@ -2402,24 +2415,16 @@ void drain_all_pages(struct zone *zone)
>                       cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &cpus_with_pcps);
>       }
>  
> -     if (works) {
> -             for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpus_with_pcps) {
> -                     struct work_struct *work = per_cpu_ptr(works, cpu);
> -                     INIT_WORK(work, drain_local_pages_wq);
> -                     schedule_work_on(cpu, work);
> -             }
> -             for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpus_with_pcps)
> -                     flush_work(per_cpu_ptr(works, cpu));
> -     } else {
> -             for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpus_with_pcps) {
> -                     struct work_struct work;
> -
> -                     INIT_WORK(&work, drain_local_pages_wq);
> -                     schedule_work_on(cpu, &work);
> -                     flush_work(&work);
> -             }
> +     for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpus_with_pcps) {
> +             struct work_struct *work = per_cpu_ptr(&pcpu_drain, cpu);
> +             INIT_WORK(work, drain_local_pages_wq);

It's strange to repeatedly run INIT_WORK() in this fashion. 
Overwriting an atomic_t which should already be zero, initializing a
list_head which should already be in the initialized state...

Can we instead do this a single time in init code?

> +             schedule_work_on(cpu, work);
>       }
> +     for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpus_with_pcps)
> +             flush_work(per_cpu_ptr(&pcpu_drain, cpu));
> +
>       put_online_cpus();
> +     mutex_unlock(&pcpu_drain_mutex);
>  }

Reply via email to