From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: Race condition between putback_lru_page and mem_cgroup_move_list From: Lee Schermerhorn In-Reply-To: <20080807185203.A8C2.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <489741F8.2080104@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1218041585.6173.45.camel@lts-notebook> <20080807185203.A8C2.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 07:27:14 -0400 Message-Id: <1218108434.6086.29.camel@lts-notebook> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, MinChan Kim , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , linux-mm , Rik van Riel , LKML List-ID: On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 20:00 +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > Hi > > > If you mean the "active/inactive list transition" in > > shrink_[in]active_list(), these are already batched under zone lru_lock > > with batch size determined by the 'release pages' pvec. So, I think > > we're OK here. > > No. > > AFAIK shrink_inactive_list batched zone->lru_lock, > but it doesn't batched mz->lru_lock. > > then, spin_lock_irqsave is freqently called. Ah, I see what you mean. Yes, the mem cgroup zone lru_lock will be cycled frequently as each back of pages is put back during reclaim. So, you'd like to eliminate the mz lru_lock, move the mem cgroup zone info under the corresponding zone lru_lock and move the page between memcg lists atomically with adding to global lru lists? Lee -- 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: email@kvack.org