lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Mar]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 01/11] mm/slab: hold a slab_mutex when calling __kmem_cache_shrink()
From
Date


On 03/28/2016 08:26 AM, js1304@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
>
> Major kmem_cache metadata in slab subsystem is synchronized with
> the slab_mutex. In SLAB, if some of them is changed, node's shared
> array cache would be freed and re-populated. If __kmem_cache_shrink()
> is called at the same time, it will call drain_array() with n->shared
> without holding node lock so problem can happen.
>
> We can fix this small theoretical race condition by holding node lock
> in drain_array(), but, holding a slab_mutex in kmem_cache_shrink()
> looks more appropriate solution because stable state would make things
> less error-prone and this is not performance critical path.
>
> In addtion, annotate on SLAB functions.

Just a nit but would it not be better instead of doing comment-style
annotation to use lockdep_assert_held/_once. In both cases for someone
to understand what locks have to be held will go and read the source. In
my mind it's easier to miss a comment line, rather than the
lockdep_assert. Furthermore in case lockdep is enabled a locking
violation would spew useful info to dmesg.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-03-31 13:01    [W:0.167 / U:0.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site