On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 13:45 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/2/22 13:37, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> > > > +static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + __sgx_reclaim_pages();
> > > > + cond_resched();
> > > > +}
> > > Why bother with the wrapper? Can't we just put cond_resched() in
> > > the
> > > existing sgx_reclaim_pages()?
> > Because sgx_reclaim_direct() needs to call sgx_reclaim_pages() but
> > not
> > do the cond_resched(). It was this or add a boolean or something to
> > let
> > caller's opt out of the resched.
>
> Is there a reason sgx_reclaim_direct() *can't* or shouldn't call
> cond_resched()?
Yes, it is due to performance concerns. It is explained most succinctly
by Reinette here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-sgx/a4eb5ab0-bf83-17a4-8bc0-a90aaf438a8e@xxxxxxxxx/
