Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <04709b2d0dc702c9bf50f57cde125b07cdf54363.camel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] mm/page_alloc: Replace local_lock with normal
 spinlock
From:   Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzju@redhat.com>
To:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Date:   Fri, 17 Jun 2022 11:39:03 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20220613125622.18628-8-mgorman@techsingularity.net>
References: <20220613125622.18628-1-mgorman@techsingularity.net>
         <20220613125622.18628-8-mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.2 (3.44.2-1.fc36) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

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 =3D MIGRATE_MOVABLE;
>  	}
> =20
> -	local_lock_irqsave(&pagesets.lock, flags);
> -	freed_pcp =3D free_unref_page_commit(page, migratetype, order, false);
> -	local_unlock_irqrestore(&pagesets.lock, flags);
> -
> -	if (unlikely(!freed_pcp))
> +	zone =3D 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;
})

> +	pcp =3D 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);
>  }
> =20
>  /*

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."

--=20
Nicol=C3=A1s S=C3=A1enz