linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
	Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] cpuset: fix the problem that cpuset_mem_spread_node() returns an offline node(was: Re: [regression] cpuset,mm: update tasks' mems_allowed in time (58568d2))
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 17:31:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B8F7DE7.1050705@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100304032209.GM8653@laptop>

on 2010-3-4 11:22, Nick Piggin wrote:
...
>> +	/* 
>> +	 * After current->mems_allowed is set to a new value, current will
>> +	 * allocate new pages for the migrating memory region. So we must
>> +	 * ensure that update of current->mems_allowed have been completed
>> +	 * by this moment.
>> +	 */
>> +	smp_wmb();
>>  	do_migrate_pages(mm, from, to, MPOL_MF_MOVE_ALL);
>>  
>>  	guarantee_online_mems(task_cs(tsk),&tsk->mems_allowed);
>> +
>> +	/* 
>> +	 * After doing migrate pages, current will allocate new pages for
>> +	 * itself not the other tasks. So we must ensure that update of
>> +	 * current->mems_allowed have been completed by this moment.
>> +	 */
>> +	smp_wmb();
> 
> The comments don't really make sense. A task always sees its own
> memory operations in program order. You keep saying *current* allocates
> pages so *current*->mems_allowed must be updated. This doesn't make
> sense. Do you mean to say tsk->?
> 
> Secondly, memory ordering operations do not ensure anything is
> completed. They only ensure ordering. So to make sense to use them,
> you generally need corresponding barriers in other code that can
> run concurrently.
> 
> So you need to comment what is being ordered (ie. at least 2 memory
> operations). And what other code might be running that requires this
> ordering.
> 
> You need to comment to all these sites and operations. Sprinkling of
> memory barriers just gets unmaintainable.

My thought is wrong.
I thought the kernel might call do_migrate_pages() before updating
->mems_allowed, so I used smp_wmb() to ensure this order.

In fact, this problem which I worried can't occur, so these smp_wmb()
is unnecessary.

Thanks!
Miao

--
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:[~2010-03-04  9:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-03 10:44 Miao Xie
2010-03-04  3:22 ` Nick Piggin
2010-03-04  9:31   ` Miao Xie [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=4B8F7DE7.1050705@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --to=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=menage@google.com \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=rientjes@google.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