From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, page_alloc: Use static global work_struct for draining per-cpu pages
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:21:42 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170126192142.GA32152@htj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170126104732.meri27v5lf3or22j@techsingularity.net>
Hello,
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:47:32AM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 04:08:02PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > + for_each_cpu(cpu, &cpus_with_pcps) {
> > > + struct work_struct *work = per_cpu_ptr(&pcpu_drain, cpu);
> > > + INIT_WORK(work, drain_local_pages_wq);
> >
> > It's strange to repeatedly run INIT_WORK() in this fashion.
> > Overwriting an atomic_t which should already be zero, initializing a
> > list_head which should already be in the initialized state...
> >
> > Can we instead do this a single time in init code?
> >
>
> INIT_WORK does different things depending on whether LOCKDEP is enabled or
> not and also whether object debugging is enabled. I'd worry that it's not
> functionally equivalent or some future change would break the assumptions
> about what INIT_WORK does internally. The init cost is there, but it's
> insignicant in comparison to the whole workqueue operation or the old
> cost of sending IPIs for that matter.
Both initing once or per each invocation are perfectly valid and
guaranteed to work. idk, I don't have a strong opinion hereag.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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:[~2017-01-26 19:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-25 8:30 Mel Gorman
2017-01-25 9:24 ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-01-25 9:33 ` Hillf Danton
2017-01-26 0:08 ` Andrew Morton
2017-01-26 10:47 ` Mel Gorman
2017-01-26 19:21 ` Tejun Heo [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=20170126192142.GA32152@htj.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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