linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mingo@kernel.org,
	peterz@infradead.org, riel@redhat.com, mgorman@suse.de,
	aswin@hp.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm/rmap: share the i_mmap_rwsem
Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 13:48:42 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1401137322.12982.5.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1405261216460.3411@eggly.anvils>

On Mon, 2014-05-26 at 12:35 -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2014, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> 
> > Similarly to rmap_walk_anon() and collect_procs_anon(),
> > there is opportunity to share the lock in rmap_walk_file()
> > and collect_procs_file() for file backed pages.
> 
> And lots of other places, no?  I welcome i_mmap_rwsem, but I think
> you're approaching it wrongly to separate this off from 2/5, then
> follow anon_vma for the places that can be converted to lock_read().

Sure, but as you can imagine, the reasoning behind it is simplicity and
bisectability. 2/5 is easy to commit typo-like errors, and end up
locking instead of unlocking and vice versa. I ran into a few while
testing and wanted to make life easier for reviewers.

> If you go back through 2/5 and study the context of each, I think
> you'll find most make no modification to the tree, and can well
> use the lock_read() rather than the lock_write().

I was planning on revisiting some of that. I have no concrete examples
yet, but I agree, there could very well be further opportunity to share
the lock in read-only paths. This 4/5 is just the first, and most
obvious, step towards improving the usage of the i_mmap lock.

> I could be wrong, but I don't think there are any hidden gotchas.
> There certainly are in the anon_vma case (where THP makes special
> use of the anon_vma lock), and used to be in the i_mmap_lock case
> (when invalidation had to be single-threaded across cond_rescheds),
> but I think i_mmap_rwsem should be straightforward.
> 
> Sure, it's safe to use the lock_write() variant, but please don't
> prefer it to lock_read() without good reason.

I will dig deeper (probably for 3.17 now), but I really believe this is
the correct way of splitting the patches for this particular series.

Thanks,
Davidlohr

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2014-05-26 20:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-23  3:33 [PATCH 0/5] mm: i_mmap_mutex to rwsem Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-23  3:33 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm,fs: introduce helpers around i_mmap_mutex Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-23 17:16   ` Rik van Riel
2014-05-23  3:33 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: use new helper functions around the i_mmap_mutex Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-23 17:16   ` Rik van Riel
2014-05-23  3:33 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm: convert i_mmap_mutex to rwsem Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-23 17:33   ` Rik van Riel
2014-05-23  3:33 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm/rmap: share the i_mmap_rwsem Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-23 18:35   ` Rik van Riel
2014-05-26 19:35   ` Hugh Dickins
2014-05-26 20:48     ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2014-05-23  3:33 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm: rename leftover i_mmap_mutex Davidlohr Bueso
2014-05-23 18:36   ` Rik van Riel
2014-05-30  2:20 ` [PATCH 0/5] mm: i_mmap_mutex to rwsem Davidlohr Bueso
2014-06-02 20:08   ` Andrew Morton
2014-06-02 20:31     ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-06-02 23:54       ` Hugh Dickins
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-06-25  0:21 Davidlohr Bueso
2013-06-25  0:21 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm/rmap: share the i_mmap_rwsem Davidlohr Bueso

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=1401137322.12982.5.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net \
    --to=davidlohr@hp.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=aswin@hp.com \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    /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