From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] hugetlbfs: Disable softIRQ when taking hugetlb_lock
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 13:32:39 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871rt99qmg.fsf@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191212060650.ftqq27ftutxpc5hq@linux-p48b> (Davidlohr Bueso's message of "Wed, 11 Dec 2019 22:06:50 -0800")
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> writes:
> +void free_huge_page(struct page *page)
> +{
> + struct hugetlb_free_page_work work;
> +
> + work.page = page;
> + INIT_WORK_ONSTACK(&work.work, free_huge_page_workfn);
> + queue_work(hugetlb_free_page_wq, &work.work);
> +
> + /*
> + * Wait until free_huge_page is done.
> + */
> + flush_work(&work.work);
> + destroy_work_on_stack(&work.work);
Does flushing really work in softirq context?
Anyways, waiting seems inefficient over fire'n'forget
You'll need a per cpu pre allocated work item and a queue.
Then take a lock on the the queue and link the page into
it and trigger the work item if it's not already pending.
And add a in_interrupt() check of course.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-12 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-11 19:46 [PATCH v2] hugetlbfs: Disable softIRQ when taking hugetlb_lock Waiman Long
2019-12-11 22:04 ` Mike Kravetz
2019-12-11 22:19 ` Waiman Long
2019-12-12 1:11 ` Mike Kravetz
2019-12-12 6:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-12-12 6:30 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-12-12 19:04 ` [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: defer free_huge_page() to a workqueue Davidlohr Bueso
2019-12-12 19:22 ` Mike Kravetz
2019-12-12 19:36 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-12-12 20:52 ` Waiman Long
2019-12-12 21:04 ` Waiman Long
2019-12-16 13:26 ` Michal Hocko
2019-12-16 15:38 ` Waiman Long
2019-12-16 18:44 ` Waiman Long
2019-12-17 9:00 ` Michal Hocko
2019-12-17 18:05 ` Mike Kravetz
2019-12-18 12:18 ` hugetlbfs testing coverage (was: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: defer free_huge_page() to a workqueue) Michal Hocko
2019-12-12 21:01 ` [PATCH v2] mm/hugetlb: defer free_huge_page() to a workqueue Waiman Long
2019-12-16 13:37 ` Michal Hocko
2019-12-16 16:17 ` Waiman Long
2019-12-16 16:17 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2019-12-16 17:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-12-16 19:08 ` Mike Kravetz
2019-12-16 19:13 ` Waiman Long
2019-12-12 21:32 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2019-12-12 22:42 ` [PATCH v2] hugetlbfs: Disable softIRQ when taking hugetlb_lock Davidlohr Bueso
2019-12-11 23:05 ` Andi Kleen
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=871rt99qmg.fsf@linux.intel.com \
--to=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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.