On Tue, 2022-06-21 at 10:29 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 11:39:03AM +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote: > > Hi Mel, > > > > On Mon, 2022-06-13 at 13:56 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > @@ -3446,12 +3490,16 @@ void free_unref_page(struct page *page, unsigned int order) > > > migratetype = MIGRATE_MOVABLE; > > > } > > > > > > - local_lock_irqsave(&pagesets.lock, flags); > > > - freed_pcp = free_unref_page_commit(page, migratetype, order, false); > > > - local_unlock_irqrestore(&pagesets.lock, flags); > > > - > > > - if (unlikely(!freed_pcp)) > > > + zone = page_zone(page); > > > + pcp_trylock_prepare(UP_flags); > > > > Now that you're calling the *_irqsave() family of function you can drop > > pcp_trylock_prepare/finish() > > > > For the record in UP: > > > > #define spin_trylock_irqsave(lock, flags) \ > > ({ \ > > local_irq_save(flags); \ > > 1; > > }) > > > > The missing patch that is deferred for a later release uses spin_trylock > so unless that is never merged because there is an unfixable flaw in it, > I'd prefer to leave the preparation in place. > > > > + pcp = pcpu_spin_trylock_irqsave(struct per_cpu_pages, lock, zone->per_cpu_pageset, flags); > > > + if (pcp) { > > > + free_unref_page_commit(pcp, zone, page, migratetype, order); > > > + pcp_spin_unlock_irqrestore(pcp, flags); > > > + } else { > > > free_one_page(page_zone(page), page, pfn, order, migratetype, FPI_NONE); > > > + } > > > + pcp_trylock_finish(UP_flags); > > > } > > > > > > /* > > > > As Vlastimil mentioned elsewhere, I also wonder if it makes sense to just > > bypass patch #5. Especially as its intent isn't true anymore: > > > > "As preparation for dealing with both of those problems, protect the lists > > with a spinlock. The IRQ-unsafe version of the lock is used because IRQs > > are already disabled by local_lock_irqsave. spin_trylock is used in > > preparation for a time when local_lock could be used instead of > > lock_lock_irqsave." > > > > It's still true, the patch just isn't included as I wanted them to be > separated by time so a bisection that points to it is "obvious" instead > of pointing at the whole series as being a potential problem. Understood, I jumped straight into the code and missed your comment in the cover letter. Thanks! -- Nicolás Sáenz