On Sun, May 09, 2021 at 04:59:54PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 15:44:21 +0200 "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Rearm the monitor work directly from its own function that
> > is kfree_rcu_monitor(). So this patch puts the invocation
> > timing control in one place.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
> > @@ -3415,37 +3415,44 @@ static inline bool queue_kfree_rcu_work(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp)
> > return !repeat;
> > }
> >
> > -static inline void kfree_rcu_drain_unlock(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp,
> > - unsigned long flags)
> > +/*
> > + * This function queues a new batch. If success or nothing to
> > + * drain it returns 1. Otherwise 0 is returned indicating that
> > + * a reclaim kthread has not processed a previous batch.
> > + */
> > +static inline int kfree_rcu_drain(struct kfree_rcu_cpu *krcp)
> > {
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&krcp->lock, flags);
> > +
> > // Attempt to start a new batch.
> > - if (queue_kfree_rcu_work(krcp)) {
> > + ret = queue_kfree_rcu_work(krcp);
>
> This code has changed slightly in mainline. Can you please redo,
> retest and resend?
>
> > + if (ret)
> > // Success! Our job is done here.
> > krcp->monitor_todo = false;
> > - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&krcp->lock, flags);
> > - return;
> > - }
>
> It's conventional to retain the braces here, otherwise the code looks
> weird. Unless you're a python programmer ;)
>
>
Hello, Anrew.
This refactoring is not up to date and is obsolete, instead we have done
bigger rework of kfree_rcu_monitor(). It is located here:
https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu/+/2349a35d39e7af5eef9064cbd0e42309040551da%5E%21/#F0
--
Vlad Rezki
