From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADEE4C47257 for ; Mon, 4 May 2020 14:25:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A87120757 for ; Mon, 4 May 2020 14:25:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="gtaY+wOl" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6A87120757 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id B2AB78E001D; Mon, 4 May 2020 10:25:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id ADBA28E0003; Mon, 4 May 2020 10:25:55 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 9CAAB8E001D; Mon, 4 May 2020 10:25:55 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0237.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.237]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 848D08E0003 for ; Mon, 4 May 2020 10:25:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 485A0181AEF0B for ; Mon, 4 May 2020 14:25:55 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76779260670.10.ink72_33a1b88d7c44a X-HE-Tag: ink72_33a1b88d7c44a X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4930 Received: from mail-lf1-f66.google.com (mail-lf1-f66.google.com [209.85.167.66]) by imf29.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 4 May 2020 14:25:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-f66.google.com with SMTP id a9so4514080lfb.8 for ; Mon, 04 May 2020 07:25:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Hhx3Y7SsgO+0pmQCmi95Yty7DE5Dn2yrj/e7yZMXjG0=; b=gtaY+wOls/Wn72DXE5zrDNRZapha54YHqFjI7tLPSTVE3KhJjRF9XPiL/Kif8hfE2b zw6O0NMqzNQslRstDGtK/vor9xwnlKEcS5gXZR5fMxNbXG/XcWKL7KHAFMr4CCROyJkv 9aQopC0oR42Cm+ssDOYsF/HbYTIW0Ou0VONYSct3LJ1arO43L/LmjP7LMlmk4XGMEi4N +sBdvzuYpExABl2O/vYbyDeZKT1HEkfVm/zqkjI6w4wmozdhQVj2e+BdqlELb54VlSSA 3fDJxPBDW29sk1fNkfeW+kbPFHOejCma3mmuau/PE2wF0UyCH6qbRhUksS2TtRpP9mOI cKbw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Hhx3Y7SsgO+0pmQCmi95Yty7DE5Dn2yrj/e7yZMXjG0=; b=blwRZSyrQtaq9N55rSVv9LO1faMetzlx/xkNpHB+PJYXhAoI+6cBAkZGPzrMhiHAx6 VfDCApcyqwmosom8+FWwJACxwBRiRv6jU8ymZdo1FzOCN9hIBnPBn0xhZiCBQhWobqcn QNjBT2NHyeCv7oOmx9P9O9jxr1ij9B7WVn/ra2d4UrEnaPHVYQPudgFlzbpbJ6clNJ9L uJ9Y2SfBcyt8icai7jEYTvYCnHnlvmObeudDdwM5N5HvjPjzaEG6MBqu1G7mKZpU4DBa tmAxT29DzupR05CObTfdIp1wcl0yizO/P3CH+Ej57AoCupLh8jB/kIT/EdzqjUNHBJnn UL7g== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubhUXBC0YwzpsyA8pAQ6Zfs1TCtq6abWfpRXchrxLbP0REhqatj EnkDrtXAFkelDuOI3HPo0CGmfJR5y0ip5g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJ4dL9JmnH70gQO29PoJf3xiH1hPxzW7b8U0rWIhC+A4/ca4FoDEcrtO/IXLdtwMMZISYRNxA== X-Received: by 2002:a19:f00b:: with SMTP id p11mr4500062lfc.210.1588602352950; Mon, 04 May 2020 07:25:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pc636 (h5ef52e31.seluork.dyn.perspektivbredband.net. [94.245.46.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i20sm10279354lfe.15.2020.05.04.07.25.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 04 May 2020 07:25:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Uladzislau Rezki X-Google-Original-From: Uladzislau Rezki Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 16:25:49 +0200 To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" , LKML , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , "Theodore Y . Ts'o" , Matthew Wilcox , Joel Fernandes , RCU , Oleksiy Avramchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/24] rcu/tree: Maintain separate array for vmalloc ptrs Message-ID: <20200504142549.GH17577@pc636> References: <20200428205903.61704-1-urezki@gmail.com> <20200428205903.61704-12-urezki@gmail.com> <20200501213753.GE7560@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200501213753.GE7560@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: > > @@ -3072,21 +3105,34 @@ static inline bool queue_kfree_rcu_work(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp) > > krwp = &(krcp->krw_arr[i]); > > > > /* > > - * Try to detach bhead or head and attach it over any > > + * Try to detach bkvhead or head and attach it over any > > * available corresponding free channel. It can be that > > * a previous RCU batch is in progress, it means that > > * immediately to queue another one is not possible so > > * return false to tell caller to retry. > > */ > > - if ((krcp->bhead && !krwp->bhead_free) || > > + if ((krcp->bkvhead[0] && !krwp->bkvhead_free[0]) || > > + (krcp->bkvhead[1] && !krwp->bkvhead_free[1]) || > > (krcp->head && !krwp->head_free)) { > > - /* Channel 1. */ > > - if (!krwp->bhead_free) { > > - krwp->bhead_free = krcp->bhead; > > - krcp->bhead = NULL; > > + /* > > + * Channel 1 corresponds to SLAB ptrs. > > + */ > > + if (!krwp->bkvhead_free[0]) { > > + krwp->bkvhead_free[0] = krcp->bkvhead[0]; > > + krcp->bkvhead[0] = NULL; > > } > > > > - /* Channel 2. */ > > + /* > > + * Channel 2 corresponds to vmalloc ptrs. > > + */ > > + if (!krwp->bkvhead_free[1]) { > > + krwp->bkvhead_free[1] = krcp->bkvhead[1]; > > + krcp->bkvhead[1] = NULL; > > + } > > Why not a "for" loop here? Duplicate code is most certainly not what > we want, as it can cause all sorts of trouble down the road. > Agree. Can be done. Thanks :) -- Vlad Rezki