Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: question on NUMA page migration | | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | | Date | Fri, 19 Oct 2012 18:39:02 +0200 |
| |
On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 11:53 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > If we do need the extra refcount, why is normal > page migration safe? :)
Its mostly a matter of how convoluted you make the code, regular page migration is about as bad as you can get
Normal does:
follow_page(FOLL_GET) +1
isolate_lru_page() +1
put_page() -1
ending up with a page with a single reference (for anon, or one extra each for the mapping and buffer).
And while I suppose I could do a put_page() in migrate_misplaced_page() that makes the function frob the page-count depending on the return value.
I always try and avoid conditional locks/refs, therefore the code ends up doing:
page = vm_normal_page() if (page) { get_page()
migrate_misplaced_page()
put_page() }
where migrate_misplaced_page() does isolate_lru_page()/putback_lru_page, and this leaves the page-count invariant.
We got a ref, therefore we must put a ref, is easier than we got a ref and must put except when...
|  |