lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] mm: compaction: Minimise the time IRQs are disabled while isolating pages for migration
On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 08:01:31AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> I am not sure it's good if we release the lock whenever lru->lock was contended
> unconditionally? There are many kinds of lru_lock operations(add to lru,
> del from lru, isolation, reclaim, activation, deactivation and so on).

This is mostly to mirror cond_resched_lock (which actually uses
spin_needbreak but it's ok to have it also when preempt is off). I
doubt it makes a big difference but I tried to mirror
cond_resched_lock.

> Do we really need to release the lock whenever all such operations were contened?
> I think what we need is just spin_is_contended_irqcontext.
> Otherwise, please write down the comment for justifying for it.

What is spin_is_contended_irqcontext?

> This patch is for reducing for irq latency but do we have to check signal
> in irq hold time?

I think it's good idea to check the signal in case the loop is very
long and this is run in direct compaction context.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-03-01 00:09    [W:0.112 / U:0.736 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site