linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/swap: piggyback lru_add_drain_all() calls
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 14:27:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191004122727.GA10845@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191004121017.GG32665@bombadil.infradead.org>

On Fri 04-10-19 05:10:17, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 01:11:06PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > This is very slow operation. There is no reason to do it again if somebody
> > else already drained all per-cpu vectors after we waited for lock.
> > +	seq = raw_read_seqcount_latch(&seqcount);
> > +
> >  	mutex_lock(&lock);
> > +
> > +	/* Piggyback on drain done by somebody else. */
> > +	if (__read_seqcount_retry(&seqcount, seq))
> > +		goto done;
> > +
> > +	raw_write_seqcount_latch(&seqcount);
> > +
> 
> Do we really need the seqcount to do this?  Wouldn't a mutex_trylock()
> have the same effect?

Yeah, this makes sense. From correctness point of view it should be ok
because no caller can expect that per-cpu pvecs are empty on return.
This might have some runtime effects that some paths might retry more -
e.g. offlining path drains pcp pvces before migrating the range away, if
there are pages still waiting for a worker to drain them then the
migration would fail and we would retry. But this not a correctness
issue.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-10-04 12:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-04 10:11 Konstantin Khlebnikov
2019-10-04 12:10 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-10-04 12:24   ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2019-10-04 12:27   ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-10-04 12:32     ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2019-10-04 12:37       ` 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=20191004122727.GA10845@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /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