You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Pulling cpu hotplug locks inside the mm core function like
lru_add_drain_all just asks for problems and the recent lockdep splat
[1] just proves this. While the usage in that particular case might be
wrong we should avoid the locking as lru_add_drain_all() is used in many
places. It seems that this is not all that hard to achieve actually.
We have done the same thing for drain_all_pages which is analogous by
commit a459eeb ("mm, page_alloc: do not depend on cpu hotplug locks
inside the allocator"). All we have to care about is to handle
- the work item might be executed on a different cpu in worker from
unbound pool so it doesn't run on pinned on the cpu
- we have to make sure that we do not race with page_alloc_cpu_dead
calling lru_add_drain_cpu
the first part is already handled because the worker calls lru_add_drain
which disables preemption when calling lru_add_drain_cpu on the local
cpu it is draining. The later is true because page_alloc_cpu_dead is
called on the controlling CPU after the hotplugged CPU vanished
completely.
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
[add a cpu hotplug locking interaction as per tglx]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <[email protected]>
Cc: Mel Gorman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
0 commit comments