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>
prev 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