From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 8651621D5AF; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 23:33:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749598387; cv=none; b=mt3YwA2TVy9GwYQ3l5XhHFAHiHukD18y6/lq7bm7IW5bSoExHUhIO8GIvq5KkZbP4cO6pH5PAykMlwMj1RydNIEcxidra1fgsw9rpnnkogv13aZtaOGPRvY03+lVWCCRNXTHIe22XMoRz0SyRPKBjnIzDIpnYcZjb11Vpnkqm80= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749598387; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mxGZjTRvPVcLhqGokrdih0Ia5bs+7zm4I2xGiIFUsd4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=kFYqi7vX3r25bTGBC2mTcQW46Lq1p8cdkeiHXTUbW9dLb80BLP0REGuLRsSa+NXkU1JcOqmZcLowvOB+nWTzG6tvrF8bDTUyG6e2diRm9A6/ZZYnS9pcr//A43JfKmscjf5E/mJwvUJ+DjCDv5sLqyX1VYbyejfcUb3TIYmQ4MQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=mz4GMpfD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="mz4GMpfD" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CA637C4CEF0; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 23:33:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1749598387; bh=mxGZjTRvPVcLhqGokrdih0Ia5bs+7zm4I2xGiIFUsd4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=mz4GMpfDr84Fj0UJvxn1bpFSiBraixonk9d0naNaahLGl+2J3bRwuNNw5G9p1qSSz mksxu8SA/YWpL74R601ohIj4y5vp3EWdNwb4LM8m1HQJouxYbFsFCOYuxUDS6YtkhR eeFVUZnH+jDXQAWQ9buThneFp0DB4cw5GGHoR0F8Nd0rHBNXXmeN+jXaAfFwdE8tIm l8w0eSw+TmMkln0ZY0Zt84VP7ZwGWV/iyyq8PlYe0rEzusNf1WFQK2Ne3RTyhapr0K xvMU68ZdAXu2ORVtDiKR/urvKodbxjYjFUKAwf+NZEhS9ts5vNQNr6QU2t8sLJybEk C3p8UE+B8CMIQ== Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:33:05 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Shakeel Butt Cc: Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Roman Gushchin , Muchun Song , Vlastimil Babka , Alexei Starovoitov , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= , Harry Yoo , Yosry Ahmed , bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Meta kernel team Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] cgroup: make css_rstat_updated nmi safe Message-ID: References: <20250609225611.3967338-1-shakeel.butt@linux.dev> <20250609225611.3967338-3-shakeel.butt@linux.dev> <35ppn2muk4bsyosca4nxnbv5l6qv4ov2cxg5ksypst5ldf5zc4@vwrpziws4wjy> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hello, On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 04:28:23PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote: ... > I was actually thinking of using this_cpu_cmpxchg but then I need to > also check for CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_NMI_SAFE_THIS_CPU_OPS. However if you > prefer that, I can try this_cpu_cmpxchg in the next version. Yeah, I don't think it'd make any performance differences, but, provided it doesn't too much complexity, it'd make things less confusing as the construct being used aligns with the problem being solved. Thanks. -- tejun