Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1368957
| From | Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm/slab: hold a slab_mutex when calling __kmem_cache_shrink() |
| Date | 2016-04-01 04:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <riWQO-62F-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rhxUt-2rs-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rhxUt-2rs-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <riIuu-3Hf-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 01:53:14PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 03/28/2016 08:26 AM, js1304@gmail.com wrote: > > From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> > > > > Major kmem_cache metadata in slab subsystem is synchronized with > > the slab_mutex. In SLAB, if some of them is changed, node's shared > > array cache would be freed and re-populated. If __kmem_cache_shrink() > > is called at the same time, it will call drain_array() with n->shared > > without holding node lock so problem can happen. > > > > We can fix this small theoretical race condition by holding node lock > > in drain_array(), but, holding a slab_mutex in kmem_cache_shrink() > > looks more appropriate solution because stable state would make things > > less error-prone and this is not performance critical path. > > > > In addtion, annotate on SLAB functions. > > Just a nit but would it not be better instead of doing comment-style > annotation to use lockdep_assert_held/_once. In both cases for someone > to understand what locks have to be held will go and read the source. In > my mind it's easier to miss a comment line, rather than the > lockdep_assert. Furthermore in case lockdep is enabled a locking > violation would spew useful info to dmesg. Good idea. I'm not sure if lockdep_assert is best fit but I will add something to check it rather than just adding the comment. Thanks.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 01/11] mm/slab: hold a slab_mutex when calling __kmem_cache_shrink() js1304@gmail.com - 2016-03-28 07:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm/slab: hold a slab_mutex when calling __kmem_cache_shrink() Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> - 2016-03-29 03:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm/slab: hold a slab_mutex when calling __kmem_cache_shrink() Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-03-30 10:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm/slab: hold a slab_mutex when calling __kmem_cache_shrink() Nikolay Borisov <kernel@kyup.com> - 2016-03-31 13:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 01/11] mm/slab: hold a slab_mutex when calling __kmem_cache_shrink() Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-04-01 04:20 +0200
csiph-web