lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -mm] mm, swap: Fix race between swapoff and some swap operations
On Fri, 08 Dec 2017 16:41:38 +0800 "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> wrote:

> > Why do we need srcu here? Is it enough with rcu like below?
> >
> > It might have a bug/room to be optimized about performance/naming.
> > I just wanted to show my intention.
>
> Yes. rcu should work too. But if we use rcu, it may need to be called
> several times to make sure the swap device under us doesn't go away, for
> example, when checking si->max in __swp_swapcount() and
> add_swap_count_continuation(). And I found we need rcu to protect swap
> cache radix tree array too. So I think it may be better to use one
> calling to srcu_read_lock/unlock() instead of multiple callings to
> rcu_read_lock/unlock().

Or use stop_machine() ;) It's very crude but it sure is simple. Does
anyone have a swapoff-intensive workload?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-08 23:09    [W:0.085 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site