From: cl@linux.com (Christoph Lameter)
Subject: [ltt-dev] [PATCH] Fix dirty page accounting in redirty_page_for_writepage()
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 10:12:54 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0904301009530.14178@qirst.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090430141211.GB5922@Krystal>
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > The 3 variants on x86 generate the same instructions. On other platforms
> > they would need to be able to fallback in various way depending on the
> > availability of instructions that are atomic vs. preempt or irqs.
> >
>
> The problem here, as we did figure out a while ago with the atomic
> slub we worked on a while ago, is that if we have the following code :
>
> local_irq_save
> var++
> var++
> local_irq_restore
>
> that we would like to turn into irq-safe percpu variant with this
> semantic :
>
> percpu_add_irqsafe(var)
> percpu_add_irqsafe(var)
>
> We are generating two irq save/restore in the fallback, which will be
> slow.
>
> However, we could do the following trick :
>
> percpu_irqsave(flags);
> percpu_add_irq(var);
> percpu_add_irq(var);
> percpu_irqrestore(flags);
Hmmm.I do not remember any of those double ops in the patches that I did a
while back for this. It does not make sense either because atomic per cpu
ops are only atomic for a single instruction. You are trying to extend
that so that multiple "atomic" instructions are now atomic.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-30 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-29 23:25 Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-04-29 23:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-04-29 23:59 ` Andrew Morton
2009-04-30 2:34 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-04-30 0:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-30 2:43 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-04-30 6:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 6:33 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-04-30 6:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 13:38 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 14:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 14:12 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-04-30 14:12 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2009-04-30 19:41 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-04-30 20:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 21:17 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-04-30 13:22 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 13:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 13:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 14:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 14:15 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 14:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 14:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 15:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 15:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 15:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 15:44 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 16:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 16:11 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 16:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-30 17:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 18:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 16:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-30 15:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 16:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 16:08 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 13:50 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-04-30 13:55 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 14:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 14:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-04-30 14:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 16:03 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
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=alpine.DEB.1.10.0904301009530.14178@qirst.com \
--to=cl@linux.com \
/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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox