Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161055Ab2JYMUa (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2012 08:20:30 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:50729 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757887Ab2JYMU0 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2012 08:20:26 -0400 Message-ID: <1351167554.23337.14.camel@twins> Subject: Re: [patch for-3.7] mm, mempolicy: fix printing stack contents in numa_maps From: Peter Zijlstra To: David Rientjes Cc: Sasha Levin , Mel Gorman , Rik van Riel , Dave Jones , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , KOSAKI Motohiro , bhutchings@solarflare.com, Konstantin Khlebnikov , Naoya Horiguchi , Hugh Dickins , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 14:19:14 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20121008150949.GA15130@redhat.com> <20121017040515.GA13505@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1491 Lines: 34 On Wed, 2012-10-24 at 17:08 -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > Ok, this looks the same but it's actually a different issue: > mpol_misplaced(), which now only exists in linux-next and not in 3.7-rc2, > calls get_vma_policy() which may take the shared policy mutex. This > happens while holding page_table_lock from do_huge_pmd_numa_page() but > also from do_numa_page() while holding a spinlock on the ptl, which is > coming from the sched/numa branch. > > Is there anyway that we can avoid changing the shared policy mutex back > into a spinlock (it was converted in b22d127a39dd ["mempolicy: fix a race > in shared_policy_replace()"])? > > Adding Peter, Rik, and Mel to the cc. Urgh, crud I totally missed that. So the problem is that we need to compute if the current page is placed 'right' while holding pte_lock in order to avoid multiple pte_lock acquisitions on the 'fast' path. I'll look into this in a bit, but one thing that comes to mind is having both a spnilock and a mutex and require holding both for modification while either one is sufficient for read. That would allow sp_lookup() to use the spinlock, while insert and replace can hold both. Not sure it will work for this, need to stare at this code a little more. -- 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/