Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/3] track numbers of pagetable pages

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

 



On Sat, 2011-04-16 at 10:44 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> >  static inline void pgtable_page_dtor(struct mm_struct *mm, struct page *page)
> >  {
> >  	pte_lock_deinit(page);
> > +	dec_mm_counter(mm, MM_PTEPAGES);
> >  	dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_PAGETABLE);
> >  }
> 
> I'm probably missing something really obvious but...
> 
> Is this safe in the non-USE_SPLIT_PTLOCKS case? If we're not using
> split-ptlocks then inc/dec_mm_counter() are only safe when done under
> mm->page_table_lock, right? But it looks to me like we can end up doing,
> 
>   __pte_alloc()
>       pte_alloc_one()
>           pgtable_page_ctor()
> 
> before acquiring mm->page_table_lock in __pte_alloc().

No, it's probably not safe.  We'll have to come up with something a bit
different in that case.  Either that, or just kill the non-atomic case.
Surely there's some percpu magic counter somewhere in the kernel that is
optimized for fast (unlocked?) updates and rare, slow reads.

-- Dave

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>


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