From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FABF156250 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2024 12:19:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726575590; cv=none; b=ZcvH2hngXPMq1vRLzY4Sbg2AIwl+gGZjQtX9dAj227KkJZ7NKPEmpUkRhzcEquUjHFWghUNURju3fK9GaXqD/N41huqtLd1+DHm4L0so2+7RJdAFynOGHhMx3s+oLWNRFnJFRXnjHClfvvbX3nwY6bcUV4hY14nT6lEFSTt1wIA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726575590; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ysMaVrmccLvAsJpHtXtCUt5fwM1sEzRh4w2ysymCwgQ=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=cWCT30NW9QhjzxwvyttE2AjFPEnEb7XAzZHlmVswy6DOXmco9UkpGIbTDnCNBtCc4A4awHnmfI5Go3ui6fF6Ozbk0Y20oiJpvWsi5R0Q3YpPK+ugNRt8x7Bc6u3v6Y9auQLAFdcx7Vosz3l+n2N5TI+eptUwgF20mkJLfICEjuw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=WJW0SVc8; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=8tRFJZpA; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="WJW0SVc8"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="8tRFJZpA" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1726575587; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=wQndafcmk9PWFnoR4Ov7CRlR9eb2pjcJP6NIxwAilGk=; b=WJW0SVc8Q6XAwPs3vfR2orQayevGv11zzXUsEhT3NisKn/cAEEXibQC2pZlS2ifViDRptR jdgDJBM9FsGPNbMVYOaL0HFAJ1q0OWpbMgIy9MEoOqguxbEwJs4hhMN6T4rxM9g5dyWPd8 +pmwjPgw9Vz8o4olzF6naXr/p3OmvIOpnYCKiyJkwQzWs5XsjG8dY40xBV+7qpavzFx9E6 F23okdMpaltllyTqWoV7ymu0efYz7/NjAEWinqwWRyKQ/hWNUeVzhjE0/c1OfFLV2NykDm +zkm+bFqzHPyepOripFJbj/zvJnID8SP4Y73csRo8wus04pEraDl94+q+QMVYg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1726575587; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=wQndafcmk9PWFnoR4Ov7CRlR9eb2pjcJP6NIxwAilGk=; b=8tRFJZpAcOzI6i4As9JPOfRX5L9HcnqUVpDeGAdE6LooQkh4kKEnuu3fqoPFGeGe+twc5G C72cKmtmN4HLPLDw== To: "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] debugobjects: Reduce contention on pool lock in fill_pool() In-Reply-To: <90546c16-52e3-b92c-d99b-724278647809@huawei.com> References: <20240911083521.2257-1-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> <20240911083521.2257-4-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> <90546c16-52e3-b92c-d99b-724278647809@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 14:19:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87ldzq1nh9.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, Sep 11 2024 at 17:04, Leizhen wrote: > On 2024/9/11 16:35, Zhen Lei wrote: >> Scenarios that use allocated node filling can also be applied lockless >> mechanisms, but slightly different. The global list obj_to_free can only >> be operated exclusively by one core, while kmem_cache_zalloc() can be >> invoked by multiple cores simultaneously. Use atomic counting to mark how >> many cores are filling, to reduce atomic write conflicts during check. In >> principle, only the first comer is allowed to fill, but there is a very >> low probability that multiple comers may fill at the time. >> >> Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner >> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei > > Hi, Thomas: > I was going to mark "Signed-off-by" as you. Because except for the > following line of changes, you wrote everything. But you're maintainer. > It doesn't seem good if I post a patch with your Signed-off-by. Please > feel free to change it, but do not forget to add "Reported-by" or > "Tested-by" for me. Suggested-by is fine. I look at it after back from travel and conferencing. Thanks, tglx