There is a lack of clarity of what exactly local_irq_save/local_irq_restore
protects in page_alloc.c . It conflates the protection of per-cpu page
allocation structures with per-cpu vmstat deltas.
This patch protects the PCP structure using local_lock which for most
configurations is identical to
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 11:47:00PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12 2021 at 12:56, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 08:55:39PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I'll update the changelog and comment accordingly. I'll decide later
> > whether to leave it or move the
On Mon, Apr 12 2021 at 12:56, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 08:55:39PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I'll update the changelog and comment accordingly. I'll decide later
> whether to leave it or move the location of the lock at the end of the
> series. If the patch is added, it'll
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 08:55:39PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 02:32:56PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > That said, there are some curious users already.
> > fs/squashfs/decompressor_multi_percpu.c looks like it always uses the
> > local_lock in CPU 0's per-cpu structure
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 02:32:56PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> That said, there are some curious users already.
> fs/squashfs/decompressor_multi_percpu.c looks like it always uses the
> local_lock in CPU 0's per-cpu structure instead of stabilising a per-cpu
> pointer.
I'm not sure how you read
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 10:24:24AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 08:59:39AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > In the end I just gave up and kept it simple as there is no benefit to
> > !PREEMPT_RT which just disables IRQs. Maybe it'll be worth considering when
> > PREEMPT_RT is
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 08:59:39AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> In the end I just gave up and kept it simple as there is no benefit to
> !PREEMPT_RT which just disables IRQs. Maybe it'll be worth considering when
> PREEMPT_RT is upstream and can be enabled. The series was functionally
> tested on
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 08:39:45AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 06:42:44PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 12:52:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > > index a68bacddcae0..e9e60d1a85d4 100644
>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 06:42:44PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 12:52:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > index a68bacddcae0..e9e60d1a85d4 100644
> > > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > @@ -112,6
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 12:52:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > index a68bacddcae0..e9e60d1a85d4 100644
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -112,6 +112,13 @@ typedef int __bitwise fpi_t;
> > static
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 09:24:14PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> There is a lack of clarity of what exactly local_irq_save/local_irq_restore
> protects in page_alloc.c . It conflates the protection of per-cpu page
> allocation structures with per-cpu vmstat deltas.
>
> This patch protects the PCP
There is a lack of clarity of what exactly local_irq_save/local_irq_restore
protects in page_alloc.c . It conflates the protection of per-cpu page
allocation structures with per-cpu vmstat deltas.
This patch protects the PCP structure using local_lock which for most
configurations is identical to
12 matches
Mail list logo
