Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752432AbbLDNno (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 08:43:44 -0500 Received: from m50-132.163.com ([123.125.50.132]:33480 "EHLO m50-132.163.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752023AbbLDNnn (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 08:43:43 -0500 Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 21:43:02 +0800 From: Geliang Tang To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Geliang Tang Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/slab.c: use list_{empty_careful,last_entry} in drain_freelist Message-ID: <20151204134302.GA6388@bogon> References: <3ea815dc52bf1a2bb5e324d7398315597900be84.1449151365.git.geliangtang@163.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-CM-TRANSID: DNGowEBZi6JmmGFWmuodAQ--.38957S3 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uf129KBjvdXoWrKw43tFWDXF18WFWDWw43GFg_yoWDGFX_Za yvqrs7Gw47Xr47Gw4fta4DArsxWr1kX395WrZ5Aw4xXr9xWa4rJw1xWryDX3y7Kw4rGwnx uw4UXF4xGw1IqjkaLaAFLSUrUUUUUb8apTn2vfkv8UJUUUU8Yxn0WfASr-VFAUDa7-sFnT 9fnUUvcSsGvfC2KfnxnUUI43ZEXa7xREEoGtUUUUU== X-Originating-IP: [116.77.147.85] X-CM-SenderInfo: 5jhoxtpqjwt0rj6rljoofrz/1tbiGQjGmVXlPrjqBQAAsX Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1283 Lines: 46 On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 08:53:21AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Geliang Tang wrote: > > > while (nr_freed < tofree && !list_empty(&n->slabs_free)) { > > > > spin_lock_irq(&n->list_lock); > > - p = n->slabs_free.prev; > > - if (p == &n->slabs_free) { > > + if (list_empty_careful(&n->slabs_free)) { > > We have taken the lock. Why do we need to be "careful"? list_empty() > shoudl work right? Yes. list_empty() is OK. > > > spin_unlock_irq(&n->list_lock); > > goto out; > > } > > > > - page = list_entry(p, struct page, lru); > > + page = list_last_entry(&n->slabs_free, struct page, lru); > > last??? The original code delete the page from the tail of slabs_free list. > > Would the the other new function that returns NULL on the empty list or > the pointer not be useful here too and save some code? Sorry, I don't really understand what do you mean. Can you please specify it a little bit? Thanks. - Geliang > > This patch seems to make it difficult to understand the code. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/