linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] clean-up and remove lockdep annotation in SLAB
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 16:43:41 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140521074340.GA3271@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1399442780-28748-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>

On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:06:10PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> This patchset does some clean-up and tries to remove lockdep annotation.
> 
> Patches 1~3 are just for really really minor improvement.
> Patches 4~10 are for clean-up and removing lockdep annotation.
> 
> There are two cases that lockdep annotation is needed in SLAB.
> 1) holding two node locks
> 2) holding two array cache(alien cache) locks
> 
> I looked at the code and found that we can avoid these cases without
> any negative effect.
> 
> 1) occurs if freeing object makes new free slab and we decide to
> destroy it. Although we don't need to hold the lock during destroying
> a slab, current code do that. Destroying a slab without holding the lock
> would help the reduction of the lock contention. To do it, I change the
> implementation that new free slab is destroyed after releasing the lock.
> 
> 2) occurs on similar situation. When we free object from non-local node,
> we put this object to alien cache with holding the alien cache lock.
> If alien cache is full, we try to flush alien cache to proper node cache,
> and, in this time, new free slab could be made. Destroying it would be
> started and we will free metadata object which comes from another node.
> In this case, we need another node's alien cache lock to free object.
> This forces us to hold two array cache locks and then we need lockdep
> annotation although they are always different locks and deadlock cannot
> be possible. To prevent this situation, I use same way as 1).
> 
> In this way, we can avoid 1) and 2) cases, and then, can remove lockdep
> annotation. As short stat noted, this makes SLAB code much simpler.
> 
> Many of this series get Ack from Christoph Lameter on previous iteration,
> but 1, 2, 9 and 10 need to get Ack. There is no big change from previous
> iteration. It is just rebased on current linux-next.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Joonsoo Kim (10):
>   slab: add unlikely macro to help compiler
>   slab: makes clear_obj_pfmemalloc() just return masked value
>   slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free_block()
>   slab: defer slab_destroy in free_block()
>   slab: factor out initialization of arracy cache
>   slab: introduce alien_cache
>   slab: use the lock on alien_cache, instead of the lock on array_cache
>   slab: destroy a slab without holding any alien cache lock
>   slab: remove a useless lockdep annotation
>   slab: remove BAD_ALIEN_MAGIC
> 
>  mm/slab.c |  391 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------------------
>  mm/slab.h |    2 +-
>  2 files changed, 140 insertions(+), 253 deletions(-)

Hello, Andrew.

Pekka seems to be busy.
Could you manage this patchset?

Thanks.

--
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>

      parent reply	other threads:[~2014-05-21  7:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-07  6:06 Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 01/10] slab: add unlikely macro to help compiler Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-07 14:21   ` Christoph Lameter
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 02/10] slab: makes clear_obj_pfmemalloc() just return masked value Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-07 14:22   ` Christoph Lameter
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 03/10] slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free_block() Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-08  0:52   ` David Rientjes
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 04/10] slab: defer slab_destroy " Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-08  1:01   ` David Rientjes
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 05/10] slab: factor out initialization of arracy cache Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-08  1:19   ` David Rientjes
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 06/10] slab: introduce alien_cache Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 07/10] slab: use the lock on alien_cache, instead of the lock on array_cache Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 08/10] slab: destroy a slab without holding any alien cache lock Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 09/10] slab: remove a useless lockdep annotation Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-07 14:25   ` Christoph Lameter
2014-05-07  6:06 ` [PATCH v2 10/10] slab: remove BAD_ALIEN_MAGIC Joonsoo Kim
2014-05-07 14:24   ` Christoph Lameter
2014-05-21  7:43 ` Joonsoo Kim [this message]

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=20140521074340.GA3271@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE \
    --to=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@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