Re: in_irq_or_nmi()

[Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>]

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:59:28AM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:12:19 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 09:58:17AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 05:15:00PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:  
> > > > And I also verified it worked:
> > > > 
> > > >   0.63 │       mov    __preempt_count,%eax
> > > >        │     free_hot_cold_page():
> > > >   1.25 │       test   $0x1f0000,%eax
> > > >        │     ↓ jne    1e4
> > > > 
> > > > And this simplification also made the compiler change this into a
> > > > unlikely branch, which is a micro-optimization (that I will leave up to
> > > > the compiler).  
> > > 
> > > Excellent!  That said, I think we should define in_irq_or_nmi() in
> > > preempt.h, rather than hiding it in the memory allocator.  And since we're
> > > doing that, we might as well make it look like the other definitions:
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/preempt.h b/include/linux/preempt.h
> > > index 7eeceac52dea..af98c29abd9d 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/preempt.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/preempt.h
> > > @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@
> > >  #define in_interrupt()		(irq_count())
> > >  #define in_serving_softirq()	(softirq_count() & SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)
> > >  #define in_nmi()		(preempt_count() & NMI_MASK)
> > > +#define in_irq_or_nmi()		(preempt_count() & (HARDIRQ_MASK | NMI_MASK))
> > >  #define in_task()		(!(preempt_count() & \
> > >  				   (NMI_MASK | HARDIRQ_MASK | SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)))
> > >    
> > 
> > No, that's horrible. Also, wth is this about? A memory allocator that
> > needs in_nmi()? That sounds beyond broken.
> 
> It is the other way around. We want to exclude NMI and HARDIRQ from
> using the per-cpu-pages (pcp) lists "order-0 cache" (they will
> fall-through using the normal buddy allocator path).

Any in_nmi() code arriving at the allocator is broken. No need to fix
the allocator.