On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 12:50:54PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Thu 01-05-14 09:44:48, Mel Gorman wrote: > > From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx> > > > > This patch introduces a new page flag for 64-bit capable machines, > > PG_waiters, to signal there are processes waiting on PG_lock and uses it to > > avoid memory barriers and waitqueue hash lookup in the unlock_page fastpath. > > > > This adds a few branches to the fast path but avoids bouncing a dirty > > cache line between CPUs. 32-bit machines always take the slow path but the > > primary motivation for this patch is large machines so I do not think that > > is a concern. > ... > > /* > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/wait.c b/kernel/sched/wait.c > > index 7d50f79..fb83fe0 100644 > > --- a/kernel/sched/wait.c > > +++ b/kernel/sched/wait.c > > @@ -304,8 +304,7 @@ int wake_bit_function(wait_queue_t *wait, unsigned mode, int sync, void *arg) > > = container_of(wait, struct wait_bit_queue, wait); > > > > if (wait_bit->key.flags != key->flags || > > - wait_bit->key.bit_nr != key->bit_nr || > > - test_bit(key->bit_nr, key->flags)) > > + wait_bit->key.bit_nr != key->bit_nr) > > return 0; > > else > > return autoremove_wake_function(wait, mode, sync, key); > This change seems to be really unrelated? And it would deserve a comment > on its own I'd think so maybe split that in a separate patch? > Without it processes can sleep forever on the lock bit and hang due to races between when the PG_waiters is set and cleared. I'll investigate if this can be done a better way. > > diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c > > index c60ed0f..93e4385 100644 > > --- a/mm/filemap.c > > +++ b/mm/filemap.c > > +int __wait_on_page_locked_killable(struct page *page) > > +{ > > + int ret = 0; > > + wait_queue_head_t *wq = page_waitqueue(page); > > + DEFINE_WAIT_BIT(wait, &page->flags, PG_locked); > > + > > + if (!test_bit(PG_locked, &page->flags)) > > + return 0; > > + do { > > + prepare_to_wait(wq, &wait.wait, TASK_KILLABLE); > > + if (!PageWaiters(page)) > > + SetPageWaiters(page); > > + if (likely(PageLocked(page))) > > + ret = sleep_on_page_killable(page); > > + finish_wait(wq, &wait.wait); > > + } while (PageLocked(page) && !ret); > So I'm somewhat wondering why this is the only page waiting variant that > does finish_wait() inside the loop. Everyone else does it outside the while > loop which seems sufficient to me even in this case... > No reason. The finish_wait can always be outside. I'll fix it up. Thanks. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html