linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: remove unneeded preempt_disable
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 19:04:24 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110906190424.ad5cc647.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110906095852.GA25053@redhat.com>

On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 11:58:52 +0200
Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 11:50:53PM -0700, Greg Thelen wrote:
> > Both mem_cgroup_charge_statistics() and mem_cgroup_move_account() were
> > unnecessarily disabling preemption when adjusting per-cpu counters:
> >     preempt_disable()
> >     __this_cpu_xxx()
> >     __this_cpu_yyy()
> >     preempt_enable()
> > 
> > This change does not disable preemption and thus CPU switch is possible
> > within these routines.  This does not cause a problem because the total
> > of all cpu counters is summed when reporting stats.  Now both
> > mem_cgroup_charge_statistics() and mem_cgroup_move_account() look like:
> >     this_cpu_xxx()
> >     this_cpu_yyy()
> > 
> > Reported-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
> 
> I just noticed that both cases have preemption disabled anyway because
> of the page_cgroup bit spinlock.
> 
> So removing the preempt_disable() is fine but we can even keep the
> non-atomic __this_cpu operations.
> 
> Something like this instead?
> 
> ---
> From: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>
> Subject: mm: memcg: remove needless recursive preemption disabling
> 
> Callsites of mem_cgroup_charge_statistics() hold the page_cgroup bit
> spinlock, which implies disabled preemption.
> 
> The same goes for the explicit preemption disabling to account mapped
> file pages in mem_cgroup_move_account().
> 
> The explicit disabling of preemption in both cases is redundant.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>

Could you add comments as
"This operation is called under bit spin lock !" ?

Nice catch.

Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hioryu@jp.fujitsu.com>

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2011-09-06 10:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-08-18  6:50 Greg Thelen
2011-08-18  6:52 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-08-18  9:38 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-08-18 14:26   ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-08-18 14:41     ` Johannes Weiner
2011-08-18 18:27       ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-08-18 21:40 ` Andrew Morton
2011-08-19  0:00   ` Greg Thelen
2011-08-25 14:57   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-25 15:11     ` Christoph Lameter
2011-08-25 16:20       ` James Bottomley
2011-08-25 16:31         ` Christoph Lameter
2011-08-25 16:34           ` James Bottomley
2011-08-25 17:07             ` Christoph Lameter
2011-08-25 18:34               ` James Bottomley
2011-08-25 18:46                 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-08-25 18:49                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-25 18:53                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-25 19:05                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-25 19:19                     ` Christoph Lameter
2011-08-25 22:56                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-25 19:29                   ` James Bottomley
2011-08-25 23:01                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-25 18:40           ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-06  9:58 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-09-06 10:04   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2011-09-06 10:49     ` Johannes Weiner
2011-09-06 10:45       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-09-06 18:04   ` Greg Thelen

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=20110906190424.ad5cc647.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=gthelen@google.com \
    --cc=jweiner@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
    /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