Re: [PATCH] mm/slub: make add_full() condition more explicit

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

 



ping :)

On 2020/8/11 10:02, wuyun.wu@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Abel Wu <wuyun.wu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> The commit below is incomplete, as it didn't handle the add_full() part.
> commit a4d3f8916c65 ("slub: remove useless kmem_cache_debug() before remove_full()")
> 
> This patch checks for SLAB_STORE_USER instead of kmem_cache_debug(),
> since that should be the only context in which we need the list_lock for
> add_full().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.wu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  mm/slub.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index f226d66408ee..df93a5a0e9a4 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -2182,7 +2182,8 @@ static void deactivate_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page,
>  		}
>  	} else {
>  		m = M_FULL;
> -		if (kmem_cache_debug(s) && !lock) {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG
> +		if ((s->flags & SLAB_STORE_USER) && !lock) {
>  			lock = 1;
>  			/*
>  			 * This also ensures that the scanning of full
> @@ -2191,6 +2192,7 @@ static void deactivate_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page,
>  			 */
>  			spin_lock(&n->list_lock);
>  		}
> +#endif
>  	}
>  
>  	if (l != m) {
> 




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

  Powered by Linux