From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk" <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
"hannes@cmpxchg.org" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
"bsingharora@gmail.com" <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 2/7 v2] memcg: add memory barrier for checking account move.
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:07:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120125110725.GD25368@tiehlicka.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALWz4iyaWtes=aU79DAbEfBsNUTaHKLK5HZbNfShaxgC8UX_TQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue 24-01-12 11:04:16, Ying Han wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:04 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz> wrote:
> > On Fri 20-01-12 10:08:44, Ying Han wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 6:17 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> >> <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
[...]
> >> > I doubt .... If no barrier, this case happens
> >> >
> >> > ==
> >> > update reference
> >> > CPU A CPU B
> >> > set value
> >> > synchronize_rcu() rcu_read_lock()
> >> > read_value <= find old value
> >> > rcu_read_unlock()
> >> > do no lock
> >> > ==
> >>
> >> Hi Kame,
> >>
> >> Can you help to clarify a bit more on the example above? Why
> >> read_value got the old value after synchronize_rcu().
> >
> > AFAIU it is because rcu_read_unlock doesn't force any memory barrier
> > and we synchronize only the updater (with synchronize_rcu), so nothing
> > guarantees that the value set on CPUA is visible to CPUB.
>
> Thanks, and i might have found similar comment on the
> documentation/rcu/checklist.txt:
> "
> The various RCU read-side primitives do -not- necessarily contain
> memory barriers.
> "
>
> So, the read barrier here is to make sure no reordering between the
> reader and the rcu_read_lock. The same for the write barrier which
> makes sure no reordering between the updater and synchronize_rcu. The
> the rcu here is to synchronize between the updater and reader. If so,
> why not the change like :
>
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> per_cpu(memcg->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_ON_MOVE], cpu) += 1;
> + smp_wmb();
Threre is a data dependency between per_cpu update (the above for look)
and local read of the per-cpu on the read-side and IIUC we need to pair
write barrier with read one before we read the value.
But I might be wrong here (see the SMP BARRIER PAIRING section in
Documentation/memory-barriers.txt).
> Sorry, the use of per-cpu variable MEM_CGROUP_ON_MOVE does confuse me.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9
Czech Republic
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-25 11:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-13 8:30 [RFC] [PATCH 0/7 v2] memcg: page_cgroup diet KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-13 8:32 ` [RFC] [PATCH 1/7 v2] memcg: remove unnecessary check in mem_cgroup_update_page_stat() KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-17 15:16 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-17 23:55 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-18 13:01 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-19 2:18 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-19 20:07 ` Ying Han
2012-01-20 0:48 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-13 8:33 ` [RFC] [PATCH 2/7 v2] memcg: add memory barrier for checking account move KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-17 15:26 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-18 0:06 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-18 12:37 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-19 2:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-19 9:28 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-19 23:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-20 18:08 ` Ying Han
2012-01-23 9:04 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-24 3:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-24 8:49 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-24 19:04 ` Ying Han
2012-01-25 11:07 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2012-01-13 8:40 ` [RFC] [PATCH 3/7 v2] memcg: remove PCG_MOVE_LOCK flag from pc->flags KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-16 12:55 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-01-17 0:22 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-17 16:46 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-18 0:12 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-18 10:47 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-18 23:53 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-23 22:05 ` Ying Han
2012-01-24 4:59 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-24 8:43 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-25 23:07 ` Ying Han
2012-01-26 9:16 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-23 22:02 ` Ying Han
2012-01-24 4:47 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-25 22:48 ` Ying Han
2012-01-13 8:41 ` [RFC] [PATCH 4/7 v2] memcg: new scheme to update per-memcg page stat accounting KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-18 16:45 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-18 23:58 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-26 19:01 ` Ying Han
2012-01-13 8:42 ` [RFC] [PATCH 5/7 v2] memcg: remove PCG_FILE_MAPPED KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-19 14:07 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-26 19:10 ` Ying Han
2012-01-13 8:43 ` [RFC] [PATCH 6/7 v2] memcg: remove PCG_CACHE KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-13 8:45 ` [RFC] [PATCH 7/7 v2] memcg: make mem_cgroup_begin_update_stat to use global pcpu KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-19 14:47 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-20 2:19 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-01-20 8:38 ` Michal Hocko
2012-01-20 8:40 ` Greg Thelen
2012-01-24 3:18 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
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=20120125110725.GD25368@tiehlicka.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=yinghan@google.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