From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, Bob Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: add PageWaiters indicating tasks are waiting for a page bit Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 15:26:15 +1000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20161229152615.2dad5402@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxGz8R8J9jLvKpLUgyhWVYcgtObhbHBP7eZzZyc05AODw@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 20:16:56 -0800 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Okay. The name could be a bit better though I think, for readability. > > Just a BUILD_BUG_ON if it is not constant and correct bit numbers? > > I have a slightly edited patch - moved the comments around and added > some new comments (about both the sign bit, but also about how the > smp_mb() shouldn't be necessary even for the non-atomic fallback). That's a good point -- they're in the same byte, so all architectures will be able to avoid the extra barrier regardless of how the primitives are implemented. Good. > > I also did a BUILD_BUG_ON(), except the other way around - keeping it > about the sign bit in the byte, just just verifying that yes, > PG_waiters is that sign bit. Yep. I still don't like the name, but now you've got PG_waiters commented there at least. I'll have to live with it. If we get more cases that want to use a similar function, we might make a more general primitive for architectures that can optimize these multi bit ops better than x86. Actually even x86 would prefer to do load ; cmpxchg rather than bitop ; load for the cases where condition code can't be used to check result. > > > BTW. I just notice in your patch too that you didn't use "nr" in the > > generic version. > > And I fixed that too. > > Of course, I didn't test the changes (apart from building it). But > I've been running the previous version since yesterday, so far no > issues. It looks good to me. Thanks, Nick
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, Bob Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: add PageWaiters indicating tasks are waiting for a page bit Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 15:26:15 +1000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20161229152615.2dad5402@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxGz8R8J9jLvKpLUgyhWVYcgtObhbHBP7eZzZyc05AODw@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 20:16:56 -0800 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Okay. The name could be a bit better though I think, for readability. > > Just a BUILD_BUG_ON if it is not constant and correct bit numbers? > > I have a slightly edited patch - moved the comments around and added > some new comments (about both the sign bit, but also about how the > smp_mb() shouldn't be necessary even for the non-atomic fallback). That's a good point -- they're in the same byte, so all architectures will be able to avoid the extra barrier regardless of how the primitives are implemented. Good. > > I also did a BUILD_BUG_ON(), except the other way around - keeping it > about the sign bit in the byte, just just verifying that yes, > PG_waiters is that sign bit. Yep. I still don't like the name, but now you've got PG_waiters commented there at least. I'll have to live with it. If we get more cases that want to use a similar function, we might make a more general primitive for architectures that can optimize these multi bit ops better than x86. Actually even x86 would prefer to do load ; cmpxchg rather than bitop ; load for the cases where condition code can't be used to check result. > > > BTW. I just notice in your patch too that you didn't use "nr" in the > > generic version. > > And I fixed that too. > > Of course, I didn't test the changes (apart from building it). But > I've been running the previous version since yesterday, so far no > issues. It looks good to me. Thanks, Nick -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-29 5:26 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2016-12-25 3:00 [PATCH 0/2] PageWaiters again Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-25 3:00 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-25 3:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: Use owner_priv bit for PageSwapCache, valid when PageSwapBacked Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-25 3:00 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-25 5:13 ` Hugh Dickins 2016-12-25 5:13 ` Hugh Dickins 2016-12-25 3:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: add PageWaiters indicating tasks are waiting for a page bit Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-25 3:00 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-25 21:51 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-25 21:51 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-26 1:16 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-26 1:16 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-26 19:07 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-26 19:07 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-27 11:19 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-27 11:19 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-27 18:58 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-27 18:58 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-27 19:23 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-27 19:23 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-27 19:24 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-27 19:40 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-27 20:17 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-27 20:17 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-28 3:53 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-28 3:53 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-28 19:17 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-28 19:17 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-29 4:08 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-29 4:08 ` Nicholas Piggin 2016-12-29 4:16 ` Linus Torvalds 2016-12-29 5:26 ` Nicholas Piggin [this message] 2016-12-29 5:26 ` Nicholas Piggin 2017-01-03 10:24 ` Mel Gorman 2017-01-03 10:24 ` Mel Gorman 2017-01-03 12:29 ` Nicholas Piggin 2017-01-03 12:29 ` Nicholas Piggin 2017-01-03 17:18 ` Mel Gorman 2017-01-03 17:18 ` Mel Gorman 2016-12-29 22:16 ` [PATCH] mm/filemap: fix parameters to test_bit() Olof Johansson
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20161229152615.2dad5402@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com \ --to=npiggin@gmail.com \ --cc=agruenba@redhat.com \ --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=luto@kernel.org \ --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=rpeterso@redhat.com \ --cc=swhiteho@redhat.com \ --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.