Re: [PATCH v1 5/9] memcg: replace stats_flush_lock with an atomic

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 11:53 AM Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > +     if (atomic_xchg(&stats_flush_ongoing, 1))
> >
> > Have you profiled this? I wonder if we should replace the above with
> >
> >         if (atomic_read(&stats_flush_ongoing) || atomic_xchg(&stats_flush_ongoing, 1))
> I profiled the entire series with perf and I haven't noticed a notable
> difference between before and after the patch series -- but maybe some
> specific access patterns cause a regression, not sure.
> Does an atomic_cmpxchg() satisfy the same purpose? it's easier to read
> / more concise I guess.
> Something like
>     if (atomic_cmpxchg(&stats_flush_ongoing, 0, 1))

No, I don't think cmpxchg will be any different from xchg(). On x86,
the cmpxchg will always write to stats_flush_ongoing and depending on
the comparison result, it will either be 0 or 1 here.

If you see the implementation of queued_spin_trylock(), it does the
same as well.

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]

  Powered by Linux