From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]mmap: avoid unnecessary anon_vma lock
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:35:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110329153517.3b87842f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m2fwq718u4.fsf@firstfloor.org>
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 09:57:39 -0700
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
> Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com> writes:
>
> > If we only change vma->vm_end, we can avoid taking anon_vma lock even 'insert'
> > isn't NULL, which is the case of split_vma.
> > From my understanding, we need the lock before because rmap must get the
> > 'insert' VMA when we adjust old VMA's vm_end (the 'insert' VMA is linked to
> > anon_vma list in __insert_vm_struct before).
> > But now this isn't true any more. The 'insert' VMA is already linked to
> > anon_vma list in __split_vma(with anon_vma_clone()) instead of
> > __insert_vm_struct. There is no race rmap can't get required VMAs.
> > So the anon_vma lock is unnecessary, and this can reduce one locking in brk
> > case and improve scalability.
>
> Looks good to me.
Looks way too tricky to me.
Please review this code for maintainability. Have we documented what
we're doing as completely and as clearly as we are able?
This comment:
/*
* split_vma has split insert from vma, and needs
* us to insert it before dropping the locks
* (it may either follow vma or precede it).
*/
is now at least misleading. It doesn't explain which "locks" it means,
and with this patch we only drop a single lock.
And this comment:
/*
* When changing only vma->vm_end, we don't really need anon_vma
* lock. This is a fairly rare case by itself, but the anon_vma
* lock may be shared between many sibling processes. Skipping
* the lock for brk adjustments makes a difference sometimes.
*/
fails to explain _why_ the anon_vma lock isn't needed in this case, and
didn't tell readers why it is safe to alter vma->vm_pgoff without
anon_vma_lock().
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-29 22:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-28 1:58 [PATCH]mmap: avoid unnecessary anon_vma lock Shaohua Li
2011-03-28 16:57 ` Andi Kleen
2011-03-29 22:35 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2011-03-30 3:25 ` Andi Kleen
2011-04-18 3:05 ` Hugh Dickins
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=20110329153517.3b87842f.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).