On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 11:57 PM Alex Shi <alex.shi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > 在 2020/8/13 下午12:02, Alexander Duyck 写道: > > From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > We can drop the need for the locked variable by making use of the > > lruvec_holds_page_lru_lock function. By doing this we can avoid some rcu > > locking ugliness for the case where the lruvec is still holding the LRU > > lock associated with the page. Instead we can just use the lruvec and if it > > is NULL we assume the lock was released. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > mm/compaction.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > Thanks a lot! > Don't know if community is ok if we keep the patch following whole patchset alone? I am fine with you squashing it with another patch if you want. In theory this could probably be squashed in with the earlier patch I submitted that introduced lruvec_holds_page_lru_lock or some other patch. It is mostly just a cleanup anyway as it gets us away from needing to hold the RCU read lock in the case that we already have the correct lruvec.
