On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 06:37:42AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: >>> Since do_shrink_slab() can reschedule, we cannot protect shrinker_list >>> using one RCU section. But using atomic_inc()/atomic_dec() for each >>> do_shrink_slab() call will not impact so much. >> >> But you could use SRCU.. > > I looked into that but was advised to not go through that route due to > SRCU behind the CONFIG_SRCU. However now I see the precedence of > "#ifdef CONFIG_SRCU" in drivers/base/core.c and I think if we can take > that route if even after Minchan's patch the issue persists. Too many 'ifs' in the last sentence. I just wanted to say we can consider SRCU if the issue persists even after Minchan's patch. -- 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>
