linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Meta kernel team <kernel-team@meta.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 10/10] memcg: no more irq disabling for stock locks
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 19:19:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250314181948.A5DQsYZB@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <t6gqzrhipj3zxmev7pdmxbbbkx76eyscvkn4m66ifwcq3kfqtx@7jmqtzu5bs54>

On 2025-03-14 10:02:47 [-0700], Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > 
> > on arm64, __this_cpu_add will "load, add, store". preemptible.
> > this_cpu_add() will "disable preemption, atomic-load, add, atomic-store or
> > start over with atomic-load. if succeeded enable preemption and move an"
> 
> So, this_cpu_add() on arm64 is not protected against interrupts but is
> protected against preemption. We have a following comment in
> include/linux/percpu-defs.h. Is this not true anymore?

It performs an atomic update. So it loads exclusive from memory and then
stores conditionally if the exclusive monitor did not observe another
load on this address. Disabling preemption is only done to ensure that
the operation happens on the local-CPU and task gets not moved another
CPU during the operation. The concurrent update to the same memory
address from an interrupt will be caught by the exclusive monitor.

The reason to remain on the same CPU is probably to ensure that
__this_cpu_add() in an IRQ-off region does not clash with an atomic
update performed elsewhere.

While looking at it, there is also the LSE extension which results in a
single add _if_ atomic.

Sebastian


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-03-14 18:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-14  6:15 [RFC PATCH 00/10] memcg: stock code cleanups Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 01/10] memcg: remove root memcg check from refill_stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 02/10] memcg: decouple drain_obj_stock from local stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14  9:57   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 03/10] memcg: introduce memcg_uncharge Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 10:01   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 04/10] memcg: manually inline __refill_stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 10:05   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 05/10] memcg: no refilling stock from obj_cgroup_release Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 10:09   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-14 11:26   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-03-14 15:25     ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 06/10] memcg: do obj_cgroup_put inside drain_obj_stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 10:17   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-14 11:35     ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-03-14 15:29       ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 07/10] memcg: use __mod_memcg_state in drain_obj_stock Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 10:27   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-14 11:44     ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-03-14 11:38   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 08/10] memcg: assert in_task for couple of local_lock holders Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 09/10] memcg: trylock stock for objcg Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 11:47   ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-03-14 15:33     ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14  6:15 ` [RFC PATCH 10/10] memcg: no more irq disabling for stock locks Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 10:54   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-14 11:58     ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-03-14 15:55       ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 16:42         ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-03-14 17:02           ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 17:38             ` Shakeel Butt
2025-03-14 18:19             ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2025-03-14 13:33 ` [RFC PATCH 00/10] memcg: stock code cleanups Vlastimil Babka
2025-03-14 16:03   ` Shakeel Butt

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=20250314181948.A5DQsYZB@linutronix.de \
    --to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --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