From: Paul Menage <menage@google.com>
To: miaox@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
cl@linux-foundation.org, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuset: fix allocating page cache/slab object on the unallowed node when memory spread is set
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 11:19:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6599ad830902061119t2d82c782pb6442f9a35fbb01c@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4989606F.9030804@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 1:31 AM, Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> AFAICS this patch still has a race between a thread reading its
>> mems_allowed, and another thread updating it. The current architecture
>> of having task->mems_allowed be only updatable by current was PaulJ's
>> code originally, and I'm a bit loathe to touch it. But if we're going
>> to, we'll need at the minimum to add a lock for any code that touches
>> current->mems_allowed.
>
> Agree! But mems_allowed is touched in the module of memory management
> in general, adding a lock to protect mems_allowed may lead to performance
> regression.
>
I've asked Andrew to remove this from -mm until we can figure out:
- whether it's needed
- how to do it safely.
Basically the problem that you're seeing is that when you move a task
into a cpuset that has memory_spread_page=1, it fails to call
cpuset_update_task_memory_state()?
One thing missing from your test - can you verify that the test
program really did get migrated into the child cpuset? If it failed
(and echo failed to report the error) that would explain what you're
seeing.
Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-06 19:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-21 8:06 Miao Xie
2009-01-21 8:30 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-21 10:41 ` Paul Menage
2009-02-03 3:05 ` Miao Xie
2009-01-27 22:42 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 16:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-02-03 3:25 ` Miao Xie
2009-02-03 22:16 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-03 22:49 ` Paul Menage
2009-02-04 9:31 ` Miao Xie
2009-02-06 19:19 ` Paul Menage [this message]
2009-02-09 4:02 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-10 11:37 ` Paul Menage
2009-02-12 0:54 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-12 1:19 ` Paul Menage
2009-02-12 1:55 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-12 1:58 ` Paul Menage
2009-02-12 8:23 ` Miao Xie
2009-02-12 21:53 ` Paul Menage
2009-02-12 8:27 ` Miao Xie
2009-02-12 10:40 ` Nick Piggin
2009-02-12 5:57 ` Miao Xie
2009-02-12 11:06 ` Paul Jackson
2009-02-04 9:03 ` Miao Xie
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=6599ad830902061119t2d82c782pb6442f9a35fbb01c@mail.gmail.com \
--to=menage@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®