From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [this_cpu_xx V6 3/7] Use this_cpu operations in slub
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:56:10 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AD4950A.6050201@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0910131037420.21608@gentwo.org>
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
>> The only difference between this_cpu_ptr() and __this_cpu_ptr() is the
>> usage of my_cpu_offset and __my_cpu_offset which in turn are only
>> different in whether they check preemption status to make sure the cpu
>> is pinned down when called.
>
> Correct.
>
>> The only places where the underbar prefixed versions should be used
>> are places where cpu locality is nice but not critical and preemption
>> debug check wouldn't work properly for whatever reason. The above is
>> none of the two and the conversion is buried in a patch which is
>> supposed to do something else. Am I missing something?
>
> I used __this_cpu_* whenever the context is already providing enough
> safety that preempt disable or irq disable would not matter. The use of
> __this_cpu_ptr was entirely for consistent usage here. this_cpu_ptr would
> be safer because it has additional checks that preemption really is
> disabled. So if someone gets confused about logic flow later it can be
> dtected.
Yeah, widespread use of underscored versions isn't very desirable.
The underscored versions should notify certain specific exceptional
conditions instead of being used as general optimization (which
doesn't make much sense after all as the optimization is only
meaningful with debug option turned on). Are you interested in doing
a sweeping patch to drop underscores from __this_cpu_*() conversions?
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-13 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-07 21:10 [this_cpu_xx V6 0/7] Introduce per cpu atomic operations and avoid per cpu address arithmetic cl
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 1/7] this_cpu_ops: page allocator conversion cl
2009-10-08 10:38 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-08 10:40 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-08 16:15 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-08 10:53 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 2/7] this_cpu ops: Remove pageset_notifier cl
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 3/7] Use this_cpu operations in slub cl
2009-10-12 10:19 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-12 10:21 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-12 14:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 2:13 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-13 14:41 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 14:56 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2009-10-13 15:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 1:57 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-14 14:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-15 7:47 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-16 16:44 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-18 3:11 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 4/7] SLUB: Get rid of dynamic DMA kmalloc cache allocation cl
2009-10-13 18:48 ` [FIX] patch "SLUB: Get rid of dynamic DMA kmalloc cache allocation" Christoph Lameter
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 5/7] this_cpu: Remove slub kmem_cache fields cl
2009-10-07 23:10 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 6/7] Make slub statistics use this_cpu_inc cl
2009-10-07 21:10 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 7/7] this_cpu: slub aggressive use of this_cpu operations in the hotpaths cl
2009-10-12 10:40 ` Tejun Heo
2009-10-12 13:14 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-12 14:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 9:45 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-13 14:43 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 19:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 19:44 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-13 19:48 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 20:15 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-13 20:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 22:53 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-14 13:34 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-14 14:08 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 15:49 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-14 15:53 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-14 15:56 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 16:14 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-14 18:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-16 10:50 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-16 18:40 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-15 9:03 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-16 16:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-16 18:43 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-16 18:50 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 20:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-14 1:33 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-13 15:40 ` [this_cpu_xx V6 0/7] Introduce per cpu atomic operations and avoid per cpu address arithmetic Mel Gorman
2009-10-13 15:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-13 16:09 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-13 17:17 ` 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=4AD4950A.6050201@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
/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