From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/5] memcg: Disable preemption in memcg_check_events()
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:24:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110920142456.GC17198@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110920142031.GB17198@cmpxchg.org>
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 04:20:31PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 05:20:43PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
> >
> > The code in memcg_check_events() calls this_cpu_read() on
> > different variables without disabling preemption, and can cause
> > the calculations to be done from two different CPU variables.
> >
> > Disable preemption throughout the check to keep apples and oranges
> > from becoming a mixed drink.
>
> Makes sense, thanks!
>
> Since the atomic versions are no longer required with preemption
> disabled explicitely, could you also make the this_cpu ops in
> __memcg_event_check and __mem_cgroup_target_update non-atomic in the
> same go?
Sorry, shouldn't be on you, can you fold this in?
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
---
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index b76011a..9d4ba65 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -683,8 +683,8 @@ static bool __memcg_event_check(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int target)
{
unsigned long val, next;
- val = this_cpu_read(memcg->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_COUNT]);
- next = this_cpu_read(memcg->stat->targets[target]);
+ val = __this_cpu_read(memcg->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_COUNT]);
+ next = __this_cpu_read(memcg->stat->targets[target]);
/* from time_after() in jiffies.h */
return ((long)next - (long)val < 0);
}
@@ -693,7 +693,7 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_target_update(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int target)
{
unsigned long val, next;
- val = this_cpu_read(memcg->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_COUNT]);
+ val = __this_cpu_read(memcg->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_COUNT]);
switch (target) {
case MEM_CGROUP_TARGET_THRESH:
@@ -709,7 +709,7 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_target_update(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, int target)
return;
}
- this_cpu_write(memcg->stat->targets[target], next);
+ __this_cpu_write(memcg->stat->targets[target], next);
}
/*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-20 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-19 21:20 [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Introduce checks for preemptable code for this_cpu_read/write() Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/5] x86: Remove const_udelay() caring about which cpu var it uses Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-19 23:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/5] mm: Switch mod_state() to __this_cpu_read() Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 22:02 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-19 23:48 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:46 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 15:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 22:19 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-09-20 13:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 14:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:51 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:11 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 15:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 16:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 16:02 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:51 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 17:08 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/5] memcg: Disable preemption in memcg_check_events() Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:20 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-09-20 14:24 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2011-09-20 14:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-24 0:46 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/5] printk: Have wake_up_klogd() use __this_cpu_write() Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-19 23:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 14:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-19 21:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/5] percpu: Add preempt checks back into this_cpu_read/write() Steven Rostedt
2011-09-19 21:49 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Introduce checks for preemptable code for this_cpu_read/write() Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 3:06 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 12:44 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-09-20 13:51 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 14:58 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:17 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 14:57 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 16:08 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 16:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 17:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-20 17:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 17:25 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-09-20 18:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 18:12 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-09-20 18:27 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 18:34 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-09-20 22:32 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-09-20 22:17 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-09-21 1:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 15:46 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2011-09-20 16:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 16:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 16:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-20 18:54 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-21 15:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-21 15:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-21 15:59 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-21 16:12 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-21 16:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 2:20 ` Andi Kleen
2011-09-20 3:12 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 3:17 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 8:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-09-20 12:10 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-09-20 15:03 ` Christoph Lameter
2011-09-20 15:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-20 16:05 ` Christoph Lameter
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=20110920142456.GC17198@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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