From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757237Ab2BWXB2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2012 18:01:28 -0500 Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:54252 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756508Ab2BWXB1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2012 18:01:27 -0500 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of htejun@gmail.com designates 10.68.208.136 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=htejun@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=htejun@gmail.com Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 15:01:23 -0800 From: Tejun Heo To: Andrew Morton Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, vgoyal@redhat.com, hughd@google.com, avi@redhat.com, nate@cpanel.net, cl@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dpshah@google.com, ctalbott@google.com, rni@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] mempool, percpu, blkcg: fix percpu stat allocation and remove stats_lock Message-ID: <20120223230123.GL22536@google.com> References: <1330036246-21633-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <20120223144336.58742e1b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120223144336.58742e1b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 02:43:36PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 14:30:38 -0800 > Tejun Heo wrote: > > > This patchset is combination of the patchset "block, mempool, percpu: > > implement percpu mempool and fix blkcg percpu alloc deadlock" [1] and > > patches to remove blkg->stats_lock. > > What's changed since last time? I scanned the changelogs to see how > earlier issues were addressed and saw no mention of any of it. eg, is > the code still deadlockable if the allocator is called with __GFP_WAIT? Hmmm... going through the thread again, ah, okay, I forgot about that completely. Yeah, that is an actual problem. Both __GFP_WAIT which isn't GFP_KERNEL and GFP_KERNEL are valid use cases. I guess we'll be building async percpu pool in blkcg then. Great. :( -- tejun