Thanks David!! On 8/1/2022 2:00 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> Having said that, I am open to go for call_rcu() and infact it will be a >> much simple change where I can do the freeing of page_ext in the >> __free_page_ext() itself which is called for every section there by >> avoid the extra tracking flag PAGE_EXT_INVALID. >> ........... >> WRITE_ONCE(ms->page_ext, NULL); >> call_rcu(rcu_head, fun); // Free in fun() >> ............. >> >> Or your opinion is to use call_rcu () only once in place of >> synchronize_rcu() after invalidating all the page_ext's of memory block? > > Yeah, that would be an option. And if you fail to allocate a temporary > buffer to hold the data-to-free (structure containing rcu_head), the > slower fallback path would be synchronize_rcu(). > I will add this as a note in the code that in future If some optimizations needs to be done in this path, this option can be considered. Hope this will be fine for now? > But again, I'm also not sure if we have to optimize here right now. Thanks, Charan
