On 10/16/20 3:52 PM, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> This small patchset makes cma_release() non-blocking and simplifies
> the code in hugetlbfs, where previously we had to temporarily drop
> hugetlb_lock around the cma_release() call.
> 
> It should help Zi Yan on his work on 1 GB THPs: splitting a gigantic
> THP under a memory pressure requires a cma_release() call. If it's
> a blocking function, it complicates the already complicated code.
> Because there are at least two use cases like this (hugetlbfs is
> another example), I believe it's just better to make cma_release()
> non-blocking.
> 
> It also makes it more consistent with other memory releasing functions
> in the kernel: most of them are non-blocking.

Thanks for looking into this Roman.

I may be missing something, but why does cma_release have to be blocking
today?  Certainly, it takes the bitmap in cma_clear_bitmap and could
block.  However, I do not see why cma->lock has to be a mutex.  I may be
missing something, but I do not see any code protected by the mutex doing
anything that could sleep?

Could we simply change that mutex to a spinlock?
-- 
Mike Kravetz

Reply via email to