Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Aug 2017 11:45:45 +0200 (CEST) | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86/intel_rdt/cqm: Improve limbo list processing |
| |
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017, Vikas Shivappa wrote:
> @@ -426,6 +426,9 @@ static int domain_setup_mon_state(struct rdt_resource *r, struct rdt_domain *d) > GFP_KERNEL); > if (!d->rmid_busy_llc) > return -ENOMEM; > + INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&d->cqm_limbo, cqm_handle_limbo); > + if (has_busy_rmid(r, d)) > + cqm_setup_limbo_handler(d);
This is beyond silly. d->rmid_busy_llc is allocated a few lines above. How would a bit be set here?
> } > if (is_mbm_total_enabled()) { > tsize = sizeof(*d->mbm_total); > @@ -536,11 +539,25 @@ static void domain_remove_cpu(int cpu, struct rdt_resource *r) > list_del(&d->list); > if (is_mbm_enabled()) > cancel_delayed_work(&d->mbm_over); > + > + if (is_llc_occupancy_enabled() && > + has_busy_rmid(r, d))
What is that line break helping here and why can't you just unconditionally cancel the work?
> + cancel_delayed_work(&d->cqm_limbo); > + > kfree(d); > - } else if (r == &rdt_resources_all[RDT_RESOURCE_L3] && > - cpu == d->mbm_work_cpu && is_mbm_enabled()) { > - cancel_delayed_work(&d->mbm_over); > - mbm_setup_overflow_handler(d); > + return; > + } > + > + if (r == &rdt_resources_all[RDT_RESOURCE_L3]) { > + if (is_mbm_enabled() && cpu == d->mbm_work_cpu) { > + cancel_delayed_work(&d->mbm_over); > + mbm_setup_overflow_handler(d);
I think this is the wrong approach. If the timer is about to fire you essentially double the interval. So you better flush the work, which will reschedule it if needed.
> + } > + if (is_llc_occupancy_enabled() && cpu == d->mbm_work_cpu &&
That want's to be d->cbm_work_cpu, right?
> + has_busy_rmid(r, d)) { > + cancel_delayed_work(&d->cqm_limbo); > + cqm_setup_limbo_handler(d);
See above.
Thanks,
tglx
| |