lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Nov]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/5] writeback: fix dirtied pages accounting on sub-page writes
On Tue 22-11-11 20:30:01, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > @@ -1743,6 +1738,8 @@ void account_page_dirtied(struct page *p
> > > __inc_bdi_stat(mapping->backing_dev_info, BDI_DIRTIED);
> > > task_dirty_inc(current);
> > > task_io_account_write(PAGE_CACHE_SIZE);
> > > + current->nr_dirtied++;
> > > + __get_cpu_var(bdp_ratelimits)++;
> > I think you need preempt_disable() and preempt_enable() pair around
> > __get_cpu_var(). Otherwise a process could get rescheduled in the middle of
> > read-modify-write cycle...
>
> Hmm, I'm not worried about it at all, because bdp_ratelimits don't
> need to be accurate. In normal cases it won't even trigger one single
> call to balance_dirty_pages().
I agree regarding the accuracy. But the CPU can change when the process
is scheduled again. So you could modify counter of a CPU you are not
running on. And that can cause bad things...

> btw, account_page_dirtied() is called inside spinlock, will it be
> sufficient?
Currently it is not enough in real-time kernels and when sleeping
spinlocks work gets merged it won't be enough even in standard kernels...
And in kernels where spinlock means preemption is disabled
preempt_enable/disable will be almost for free...

Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-11-22 13:51    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans