linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] list_lru: Prefetch neighboring list entries before acquiring lock
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:53:19 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171129135319.ab078fbed566be8fc90c92ec@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1511965054-6328-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com>

On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 09:17:34 -0500 Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> wrote:

> The list_lru_del() function removes the given item from the LRU list.
> The operation looks simple, but it involves writing into the cachelines
> of the two neighboring list entries in order to get the deletion done.
> That can take a while if the cachelines aren't there yet, thus
> prolonging the lock hold time.
> 
> To reduce the lock hold time, the cachelines of the two neighboring
> list entries are now prefetched before acquiring the list_lru_node's
> lock.
> 
> Using a multi-threaded test program that created a large number
> of dentries and then killed them, the execution time was reduced
> from 38.5s to 36.6s after applying the patch on a 2-socket 36-core
> 72-thread x86-64 system.

Patch looks good.

Can someone (Dave?) please explain why list_lru_del() supports deletion
of an already list_empty(item)?  This seems a rather dangerous thing to
encourage.  Use cases I can think of are:

a) item is already reliably deleted, so why the heck was the caller
   calling list_lru_del() and 

b) item might be concurrently deleted by another thread, in which case
   the race loser is likely to hit a use-after-free.

Is there a good use case here?

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-29 21:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-29 14:17 Waiman Long
2017-11-29 21:53 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2017-11-30  0:42   ` Dave Chinner
2017-11-30 13:54     ` Waiman Long
2017-11-30 20:38       ` Dave Chinner
2017-11-30 20:55         ` Waiman Long
2017-11-30 20:47       ` Andrew Morton
2017-11-30 20:49         ` Waiman Long
2017-12-01  0:09         ` Minchan Kim
2017-12-01 14:14           ` Waiman Long
2017-12-01 22:02             ` Dave Chinner
2017-11-30  0:53 ` Minchan Kim
2017-11-30 13:43   ` Waiman Long
2017-11-30 23:53     ` Minchan Kim
2017-11-30 14:34 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-05 14:49 ` Michal Hocko
2017-12-05 23:56   ` Andrew Morton
2017-12-06  8:07     ` Michal Hocko

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=20171129135319.ab078fbed566be8fc90c92ec@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=vdavydov.dev@gmail.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