On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:05:42AM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 04:10:01PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 02:12:03PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * Whenever irq happens, these are updated so that we can
> > > + * distinguish each irq context uniquely.
> > > + */
> > > + unsigned int hardirq_id;
> > > + unsigned int softirq_id;
> >
> > An alternative approach would be to 'unwind' or discard all historical
> > events from a nested context once we exit it.
>
> That's one of what I considered. However, it would make code complex to
> detect if pend_lock ring buffer was wrapped.
I'm not sure I see the need for detecting that...
> >
> > After all, all we care about is the history of the release context, once
> > the context is gone, we don't care.
>
> We must care it and decide if the next plock in the ring buffer might be
> valid one or not.
So I was thinking this was an overwriting ring buffer; something like
so:
struct pend_lock plocks[64];
unsigned int plocks_idx;
static void plocks_add(..)
{
unsigned int idx = (plocks_idx++) % 64;
plocks[idx] = ...;
}
static void plocks_close_context(int ctx)
{
for (i = 0; i < 64; i++) {
int idx = (plocks_idx - 1) % 64;
if (plocks[idx].ctx != ctx)
break;
plocks_idx--;
}
}
Similarly for the release, it need only look at 64 entries and terminate
early if the generation number is too old.
static void plocks_release(unsigned int gen)
{
for (i = 0; i < 64; i++) {
int idx = (plocks_idx - 1 - i) % 64;
if ((int)(plocks[idx].gen_id - gen) < 0)
break;
/* do release muck */
}
}
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>