From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [rfc] optimise unlock_page
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 07:21:30 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1178745690.14928.167.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705091950080.2909@blonde.wat.veritas.com>
> Not good enough, I'm afraid. It looks like Ben's right and you need
> a count - and counts in the page struct are a lot harder to add than
> page flags.
>
> I've now played around with the hangs on my three 4CPU machines
> (all of them in io_schedule below __lock_page, waiting on pages
> which were neither PG_locked nor PG_waiters when I looked).
>
> Seeing Ben's mail, I thought the answer would be just to remove
> the "_exclusive" from your three prepare_to_wait_exclusive()s.
> That helped, but it didn't eliminate the hangs.
There might be a way ... by having the flags manipulation always
atomically deal with PG_locked and PG_waiters together. This is possible
but we would need even more weirdo bitops abstractions from the arch I'm
afraid... unless we start using atomic_* rather that bitops in order to
manipulate multiple bits at a time.
Ben.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-09 21:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20070508113709.GA19294@wotan.suse.de>
2007-05-08 11:40 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-08 20:08 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-08 21:30 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-05-08 22:41 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-08 22:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-09 19:33 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-09 21:21 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2007-05-10 3:37 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-10 19:14 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-11 8:54 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-11 13:15 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-13 3:32 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-13 4:39 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-13 6:52 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-16 17:54 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-16 18:18 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-16 19:28 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-16 19:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-17 6:27 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-16 17:21 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-16 17:38 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-08 12:13 ` David Howells
2007-05-08 22:35 ` Nick Piggin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1178745690.14928.167.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox