Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sat, 4 Jan 2020 07:39:25 +0800
From:   Wei Yang <richardw.yang@linux.intel.com>
To:     David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc:     Wei Yang <richardw.yang@linux.intel.com>, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
        mhocko@kernel.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
        cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: thp: grab the lock before manipulation defer list
Message-ID: <20200103233925.GA3678@richard>
Reply-To: Wei Yang <richardw.yang@linux.intel.com>
References: <20200103143407.1089-1-richardw.yang@linux.intel.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.2001031128200.160920@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2001031128200.160920@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 11:29:06AM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
>On Fri, 3 Jan 2020, Wei Yang wrote:
>
>> As all the other places, we grab the lock before manipulate the defer list.
>> Current implementation may face a race condition.
>> 
>> Fixes: 87eaceb3faa5 ("mm: thp: make deferred split shrinker memcg aware")
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richardw.yang@linux.intel.com>
>> 
>> ---
>> I notice the difference during code reading and just confused about the
>> difference. No specific test is done since limited knowledge about cgroup.
>> 
>> Maybe I miss something important?
>
>The check for !list_empty(page_deferred_list(page)) must certainly be 
>serialized with doing list_del_init(page_deferred_list(page)).
>

Hi David

Would you mind giving more information? You mean list_empty and list_del_init
is atomic?

-- 
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me