Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Mar 2014 16:59:15 +0100 | From | Alexander Gordeev <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/3] percpu_ida: Fix data race on cpus_have_tags cpumask |
| |
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:34:21PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > >> In theory, it still might cause percpu_ida_alloc(TASK_RUNNING) failed, > >> looks it isn't a big deal for the case. > >> > >> But I am wondering why cpumask_set_cpu() isn't called with > >> holding lock inside percpu_ida_free()? Looks 'nr_free == 1' > >> shouldn't have happened frequently. > > > > Because bouncing on the lock is more expensive than occasionally putting > > a thread into sleep. > > I mean the below block can be put inside the previous lock: > > if (nr_free == 1) > cpumask_set_cpu() > > As I mentioned, 'nr_free == 1' doesn't happen frequently, so > it won't be big deal, will it?
No. The lock will be taken *each* time in your suggestion, which is bad.
-- Regards, Alexander Gordeev agordeev@redhat.com
| |