From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f71.google.com (mail-oi0-f71.google.com [209.85.218.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E6CE6B76B8 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 00:03:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oi0-f71.google.com with SMTP id q11-v6so11431827oih.15 for ; Wed, 05 Sep 2018 21:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com. [148.163.158.5]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t88-v6si2819680oij.117.2018.09.05.21.03.55 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Sep 2018 21:03:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w863tng8128115 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 00:03:54 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com (e32.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.150]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2mathwcr85-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 00:03:54 -0400 Received: from localhost by e32.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 22:03:53 -0600 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/hugetlb: make hugetlb_lock irq safe References: <20180905112341.21355-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <20180905130440.GA3729@bombadil.infradead.org> <20180905134848.GB3729@bombadil.infradead.org> <20180905125846.eb0a9ed907b293c1b4c23c23@linux-foundation.org> <78b08258-14c8-0e90-97c7-d647a11acb30@oracle.com> <20180905150008.59d477c1f78f966a8f9c3cc8@linux-foundation.org> <20180905230737.GA14977@bombadil.infradead.org> From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 09:33:45 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Mike Kravetz , Matthew Wilcox , Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/06/2018 05:21 AM, Mike Kravetz wrote: > > BTW, free_huge_page called by put_page for hugetlbfs pages may also take > a subpool specific lock via spin_lock(). See hugepage_subpool_put_pages. > So, this would also need to take irq context into account. > I missed that. I can take care of that in next patch update based on what we decide w.r.t this patch. -aneesh