Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1450664
| From | Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Avoid soft lockup in set_max_huge_pages() |
| Date | 2016-07-26 18:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rZcVX-3LJ-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rZcMi-3It-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 07/26/2016 08:44 AM, Jia He wrote:
> This patch is to fix such soft lockup. I thouhgt it is safe to call
> cond_resched() because alloc_fresh_gigantic_page and alloc_fresh_huge_page
> are out of spin_lock/unlock section.
Yikes. So the call site for both the things you patch is this:
> while (count > persistent_huge_pages(h)) {
...
> spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock);
> if (hstate_is_gigantic(h))
> ret = alloc_fresh_gigantic_page(h, nodes_allowed);
> else
> ret = alloc_fresh_huge_page(h, nodes_allowed);
> spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock);
and you choose to patch both of the alloc_*() functions. Why not just
fix it at the common call site? Seems like that
spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock) could be a cond_resched_lock() which would fix
both cases.
Also, putting that cond_resched() inside the for_each_node*() loop is an
odd choice. It seems to indicate that the loops can take a long time,
which really isn't the case. The _loop_ isn't long, right?
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Avoid soft lockup in set_max_huge_pages() Jia He <hejianet@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 17:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Avoid soft lockup in set_max_huge_pages() Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> - 2016-07-26 18:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Avoid soft lockup in set_max_huge_pages() hejianet <hejianet@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 18:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Avoid soft lockup in set_max_huge_pages() hejianet <hejianet@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 03:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Avoid soft lockup in set_max_huge_pages() Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> - 2016-07-27 17:30 +0200
csiph-web