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
next prev 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