From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Zach Brown <zab@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch,v2] bdi: add a user-tunable cpu_list for the bdi flusher threads
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 13:34:05 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121204023405.GE32450@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x49lidfnf0s.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 01:53:39PM -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In realtime environments, it may be desirable to keep the per-bdi
> flusher threads from running on certain cpus. This patch adds a
> cpu_list file to /sys/class/bdi/* to enable this. The default is to tie
> the flusher threads to the same numa node as the backing device (though
> I could be convinced to make it a mask of all cpus to avoid a change in
> behaviour).
The default seems reasonable to me.
> Comments, as always, are appreciated.
.....
> +static ssize_t cpu_list_store(struct device *dev,
> + struct device_attribute *attr, const char *buf, size_t count)
> +{
> + struct backing_dev_info *bdi = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> + struct bdi_writeback *wb = &bdi->wb;
> + cpumask_var_t newmask;
> + ssize_t ret;
> + struct task_struct *task;
> +
> + if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&newmask, GFP_KERNEL))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + ret = cpulist_parse(buf, newmask);
> + if (!ret) {
> + spin_lock(&bdi->wb_lock);
> + task = wb->task;
> + if (task)
> + get_task_struct(task);
> + spin_unlock(&bdi->wb_lock);
> + if (task) {
> + ret = set_cpus_allowed_ptr(task, newmask);
> + put_task_struct(task);
> + }
Why is this set here outside the bdi->flusher_cpumask_mutex?
Also, I'd prefer it named "..._lock" as that is the normal
convention for such variables. You can tell the type of lock from
the declaration or the use...
....
> @@ -437,6 +488,14 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
> spin_lock_bh(&bdi->wb_lock);
> bdi->wb.task = task;
> spin_unlock_bh(&bdi->wb_lock);
> + mutex_lock(&bdi->flusher_cpumask_mutex);
> + ret = set_cpus_allowed_ptr(task,
> + bdi->flusher_cpumask);
> + mutex_unlock(&bdi->flusher_cpumask_mutex);
As it is set under the lock here....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Zach Brown <zab@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch,v2] bdi: add a user-tunable cpu_list for the bdi flusher threads
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 13:34:05 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121204023405.GE32450@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x49lidfnf0s.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 01:53:39PM -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In realtime environments, it may be desirable to keep the per-bdi
> flusher threads from running on certain cpus. This patch adds a
> cpu_list file to /sys/class/bdi/* to enable this. The default is to tie
> the flusher threads to the same numa node as the backing device (though
> I could be convinced to make it a mask of all cpus to avoid a change in
> behaviour).
The default seems reasonable to me.
> Comments, as always, are appreciated.
.....
> +static ssize_t cpu_list_store(struct device *dev,
> + struct device_attribute *attr, const char *buf, size_t count)
> +{
> + struct backing_dev_info *bdi = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> + struct bdi_writeback *wb = &bdi->wb;
> + cpumask_var_t newmask;
> + ssize_t ret;
> + struct task_struct *task;
> +
> + if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&newmask, GFP_KERNEL))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + ret = cpulist_parse(buf, newmask);
> + if (!ret) {
> + spin_lock(&bdi->wb_lock);
> + task = wb->task;
> + if (task)
> + get_task_struct(task);
> + spin_unlock(&bdi->wb_lock);
> + if (task) {
> + ret = set_cpus_allowed_ptr(task, newmask);
> + put_task_struct(task);
> + }
Why is this set here outside the bdi->flusher_cpumask_mutex?
Also, I'd prefer it named "..._lock" as that is the normal
convention for such variables. You can tell the type of lock from
the declaration or the use...
....
> @@ -437,6 +488,14 @@ static int bdi_forker_thread(void *ptr)
> spin_lock_bh(&bdi->wb_lock);
> bdi->wb.task = task;
> spin_unlock_bh(&bdi->wb_lock);
> + mutex_lock(&bdi->flusher_cpumask_mutex);
> + ret = set_cpus_allowed_ptr(task,
> + bdi->flusher_cpumask);
> + mutex_unlock(&bdi->flusher_cpumask_mutex);
As it is set under the lock here....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-04 2:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-03 18:53 [patch,v2] bdi: add a user-tunable cpu_list for the bdi flusher threads Jeff Moyer
2012-12-03 18:53 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-04 2:34 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2012-12-04 2:34 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-04 14:42 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-04 14:42 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-04 20:35 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-04 20:35 ` Dave Chinner
2012-12-04 20:14 ` Jens Axboe
2012-12-04 20:14 ` Jens Axboe
2012-12-04 20:23 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-04 20:23 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-04 20:27 ` Jens Axboe
2012-12-04 20:27 ` Jens Axboe
2012-12-04 22:26 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-04 22:26 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-05 7:43 ` Jens Axboe
2012-12-05 7:43 ` Jens Axboe
2012-12-06 18:01 ` Tejun Heo
2012-12-06 18:01 ` Tejun Heo
2012-12-06 18:08 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-06 18:08 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-06 18:13 ` Tejun Heo
2012-12-06 18:13 ` Tejun Heo
2012-12-06 18:19 ` Jens Axboe
2012-12-06 18:19 ` Jens Axboe
2012-12-06 18:22 ` Tejun Heo
2012-12-06 18:22 ` Tejun Heo
2012-12-06 18:33 ` Jeff Moyer
2012-12-06 18:33 ` Jeff Moyer
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=20121204023405.GE32450@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=zab@redhat.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.