From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@linux.dev>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Usama Arif <usama.arif@linux.dev>,
Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@kernel.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] mm: list_lru: introduce caller locking for additions and deletions
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:03:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ablfFy6xnWwZQyUq@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46d9173e-98cd-4f59-b0f3-e477afd5283b@kernel.org>
On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 11:00:59AM +0100, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> On 3/12/26 21:51, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > -/* The caller must ensure the memcg lifetime. */
> > -bool list_lru_add(struct list_lru *lru, struct list_head *item, int nid,
> > - struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > +struct list_lru_one *list_lru_lock(struct list_lru *lru, int nid,
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > {
> > - struct list_lru_node *nlru = &lru->node[nid];
> > - struct list_lru_one *l;
> > + return lock_list_lru_of_memcg(lru, nid, memcg, false, NULL, false);
>
> The two "bool" parameters really are ugly. Fortunately this is only an
> internal function.
Yeah, I absolutely hate this too. I only didn't look further because
it's internal, but...
> The callers are still a bit hard to read; we could add /*skip=empty=*/true).
>
> like
>
> return lock_list_lru_of_memcg(lru, nid, memcg, /* irq= */false, NULL,
> /* skip_empty= */false);
>
> Like we do in other code. But I guess we should do it consistently then
> (or better add some proper flags).
>
> Anyhow, something that could be cleaned up later.
This is a great idea.
I have to send a v3 for the fix in __folio_freeze_and_split_unmapped()
and the lockdep key, so I'll make this change along with it.
> > +void list_lru_unlock(struct list_lru_one *l)
> > +{
> > + unlock_list_lru(l, false, NULL);
> > +}
> > +
> > +struct list_lru_one *list_lru_lock_irqsave(struct list_lru *lru, int nid,
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> > + unsigned long *flags)
> > +{
> > + return lock_list_lru_of_memcg(lru, nid, memcg, true, flags, false);
>
> And here it gets really confusing. true false false ... am I reading
> binary code?
>
> I guess the second "false" should actually be "NULL" :)
Good catch, I'll fix that.
> > +/* The caller must ensure the memcg lifetime. */
> > +bool list_lru_add(struct list_lru *lru, struct list_head *item, int nid,
> > + struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
> > +{
> > + struct list_lru_one *l;
> > + bool ret;
> > +
> > + l = list_lru_lock(lru, nid, memcg);
> > + ret = __list_lru_add(lru, l, item, nid, memcg);
> > + list_lru_unlock(l);
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> Nice.
>
> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@kernel.org>
Thanks for your review!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-17 14:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-12 20:51 [PATCH v2 0/7] mm: switch THP shrinker to list_lru Johannes Weiner
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] mm: list_lru: lock_list_lru_of_memcg() cannot return NULL if !skip_empty Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 9:43 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-18 17:56 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-03-18 19:25 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-18 19:34 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] mm: list_lru: deduplicate unlock_list_lru() Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 9:44 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-18 17:57 ` Shakeel Butt
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] mm: list_lru: move list dead check to lock_list_lru_of_memcg() Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 9:47 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] mm: list_lru: deduplicate lock_list_lru() Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 9:51 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] mm: list_lru: introduce caller locking for additions and deletions Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 10:00 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-17 14:03 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2026-03-17 14:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 16:35 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] mm: list_lru: introduce memcg_list_lru_alloc_folio() Johannes Weiner
2026-03-17 10:09 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-12 20:51 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] mm: switch deferred split shrinker to list_lru Johannes Weiner
2026-03-18 20:25 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-18 22:48 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-19 7:21 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-20 16:02 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-23 19:39 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-20 16:07 ` Johannes Weiner
2026-03-23 19:32 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-13 17:39 ` [syzbot ci] Re: mm: switch THP " syzbot ci
2026-03-13 23:08 ` Johannes Weiner
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=ablfFy6xnWwZQyUq@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
--cc=yosry.ahmed@linux.dev \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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