lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: use in_atomic() in print_vma_addr()
From
Date


On 11/2/17 12:57 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 02-11-17 05:38:33, Yang Shi wrote:
>> commit 3e51f3c4004c9b01f66da03214a3e206f5ed627b
>> ("sched/preempt: Remove PREEMPT_ACTIVE unmasking off in_atomic()") makes
>> in_atomic() just check the preempt count, so it is not necessary to use
>> preempt_count() in print_vma_addr() any more. Replace preempt_count() to
>> in_atomic() which is a generic API for checking atomic context.
>
> But why? Is there some general work to get rid of the direct preempt_count
> usage outside of the generic API?

I may not articulate it in the commit log, I would say "in_atomic" is
*preferred* API for checking atomic context instead of preempt_count()
which should be used for retrieving the preemption count value.

I would say there is not such general elimination work undergoing right
now, but if we go through the kernel code, almost everywhere "in_atomic"
is used for such use case already, except two places:

- print_vma_addr()
- debug_smp_processor_id()

Both came from Ingo long time ago before commit
3e51f3c4004c9b01f66da03214a3e206f5ed627b ("sched/preempt: Remove
PREEMPT_ACTIVE unmasking off in_atomic()"). But, after this commit was
merged, I don't see why *not* use in_atomic() to follow the convention.

Thanks,
Yang

>
>> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com>
>> ---
>> mm/memory.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
>> index a728bed..19b684e 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory.c
>> @@ -4460,7 +4460,7 @@ void print_vma_addr(char *prefix, unsigned long ip)
>> * Do not print if we are in atomic
>> * contexts (in exception stacks, etc.):
>> */
>> - if (preempt_count())
>> + if (in_atomic())
>> return;
>>
>> down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-02 18:46    [W:0.108 / U:0.076 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site