From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, devel@openvz.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] make jump_labels wait while updates are in place
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:05:02 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F99F0BE.2060402@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120427004305.GC23877@home.goodmis.org>
(2012/04/27 9:43), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 07:51:05PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
>> In mem cgroup, we need to guarantee that two concurrent updates
>> of the jump_label interface wait for each other. IOW, we can't have
>> other updates returning while the first one is still patching the
>> kernel around, otherwise we'll race.
>
> But it shouldn't. The code as is should prevent that.
>
>>
>> I believe this is something that can fit well in the static branch
>> API, without noticeable disadvantages:
>>
>> * in the common case, it will be a quite simple lock/unlock operation
>> * Every context that calls static_branch_slow* already expects to be
>> in sleeping context because it will mutex_lock the unlikely case.
>> * static_key_slow_inc is not expected to be called in any fast path,
>> otherwise it would be expected to have quite a different name. Therefore
>> the mutex + atomic combination instead of just an atomic should not kill
>> us.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
>> CC: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>> CC: Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>
>> CC: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
>> CC: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>> CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
>> CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
>> CC: Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/jump_label.c | 21 +++++++++++----------
>> 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/jump_label.c b/kernel/jump_label.c
>> index 4304919..5d09cb4 100644
>> --- a/kernel/jump_label.c
>> +++ b/kernel/jump_label.c
>> @@ -57,17 +57,16 @@ static void jump_label_update(struct static_key *key, int enable);
>>
>> void static_key_slow_inc(struct static_key *key)
>> {
>> + jump_label_lock();
>> if (atomic_inc_not_zero(&key->enabled))
>> - return;
>
> If key->enabled is not zero, there's nothing to be done. As the jump
> label has already been enabled. Note, the key->enabled doesn't get set
> until after the jump label is updated. Thus, if two tasks were to come
> in, they both would be locked on the jump_label_lock().
>
Ah, sorry, I misunderstood somthing. I'm sorry, Glauber.
-Kame
--
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:[~2012-04-27 1:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-26 22:51 [PATCH v4 0/3] fix problem with static_branch() for sock memcg Glauber Costa
2012-04-26 22:51 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] make jump_labels wait while updates are in place Glauber Costa
2012-04-27 0:43 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-04-27 1:05 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [this message]
2012-04-27 13:53 ` Jason Baron
2012-04-27 14:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-04-27 14:59 ` Glauber Costa
2012-04-26 22:51 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] Always free struct memcg through schedule_work() Glauber Costa
2012-04-26 22:51 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] decrement static keys on real destroy time Glauber Costa
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=4F99F0BE.2060402@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=devel@openvz.org \
--cc=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jbaron@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.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 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).