From: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: "J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05g@gmail.com>,
chris@chris-wilson.co.uk, daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch,
jani.nikula@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Q. drm/i915 shrinker, synchronize_rcu_expedited() from handlers
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 14:01:37 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1494414097.6362.21.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170510104354.GB5011@redhat.com>
On ke, 2017-05-10 at 12:43 +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> It works for me too. I'm running my workstation also with
> synchronize_rcu removed from i915_gem_shrink_all in addition to the
> above. Isn't the oom method invoked from reclaim context too? As far
> as I can tell synchronize_rcu can end up throttling on a background
> synchronize_rcu_expedited(), so it might end up in the same issue
> unless removed too.
Thanks for testing and spotting my bad grepping, I'll add your T-b and
s
end v3.
Regards, Joonas
> Tested-by: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
>
> (I can't reproduce the lockups 100% of the time, but they never
> happened again with this patch and I happened to run the load that
> reproduces them a couple of times already with v4.11 and this patch
> applied)
>
> It's also certainly improving performance by removing the
> synchronize_rcu_expedited from the _count methods where it was useless
> (in addition to unsafe).
--
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-10 11:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-30 6:07 Q. drm/i915 shrinker, synchronize_rcu_expedited() from handlers J. R. Okajima
2017-04-30 9:43 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2017-05-01 2:05 ` J. R. Okajima
2017-05-05 9:39 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2017-05-05 21:57 ` Hugh Dickins
2017-05-08 8:04 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2017-05-10 3:04 ` Hugh Dickins
2017-05-10 9:54 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2017-05-10 10:43 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2017-05-10 11:01 ` Joonas Lahtinen [this message]
2017-05-05 23:28 ` J. R. Okajima
2017-05-20 1:56 ` J. R. Okajima
2017-05-22 6:02 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2017-05-30 20:00 ` Hugh Dickins
2017-05-31 7:10 ` Jani Nikula
2017-05-31 7:27 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2017-06-14 23:05 ` J. R. Okajima
2017-06-15 7:07 ` Jani Nikula
2017-06-26 23:15 ` J. R. Okajima
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=1494414097.6362.21.camel@linux.intel.com \
--to=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=hooanon05g@gmail.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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).