linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>, Yue Zhao <findns94@gmail.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: change memcg->oom_group access with atomic operations
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:18:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y/UK2zRi+WNGrWEs@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y/UDmc3+uIErpanS@P9FQF9L96D.corp.robot.car>

On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 09:47:05AM -0800, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > Wouldn't a compiler be within its rights to implement a one byte store as:
> > 
> > 	load-word
> > 	modify-byte-in-word
> > 	store-word
> > 
> > and if this is a lockless store to a word which has an adjacent byte also
> > being modified by another CPU, one of those CPUs can lose its store?
> > And WRITE_ONCE would prevent the compiler from implementing the store
> > in that way.
> 
> Even then it's not an issue in this case, as we end up with either 0 or 1,
> I don't see how we can screw things up here.

Thread 1:
	load word containing oom_group and oom_lock

Thread 2:
	store to oom_lock

Thread 1:
	store word containing oom_group and oom_lock

Thread 2's store has been lost.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-02-21 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-20 15:16 [PATCH] mm: change memcg->oom_group access with atomic operations Yue Zhao
2023-02-20 21:09 ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-20 23:06   ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21  5:17     ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21  6:52       ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21 13:51         ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-21 16:56           ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21 18:23             ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-02-21 22:23               ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21 22:38                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-02-21 23:13                   ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21 23:38                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-02-21 23:57                       ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-22  0:37                         ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-02-22  4:28                           ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21 17:47           ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21 18:15             ` Shakeel Butt
2023-02-21 18:18             ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2023-02-22  9:01           ` David Laight
2023-02-21 17:00         ` Martin Zhao
2023-02-21  7:22       ` Muchun Song
2023-02-21 17:48         ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21 17:00       ` Martin Zhao
2023-02-21 18:02         ` Roman Gushchin
2023-02-21  8:26     ` Michal Hocko
2023-02-21 17:00       ` Martin Zhao

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=Y/UK2zRi+WNGrWEs@casper.infradead.org \
    --to=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=findns94@gmail.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.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).