Re: [PATCH v5 04/18] slab: don't preemptively remove element from list in cache destroy
From: Pekka Enberg <hidden>
Date: 2012-10-24 06:54:10
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
From: Pekka Enberg <hidden>
Date: 2012-10-24 06:54:10
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Glauber Costa [off-list ref] wrote:
On 10/19/2012 11:34 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:quoted
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:quoted
I, however, see no reason why we need to do so, since we are now locked during the whole deletion (which wasn't necessarily true before). I propose a simplification in which we delete it only when there is no more going back, so we don't need to add it again.Ok lets hope that holding the lock does not cause issues. Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <redacted>BTW: One of the good things about this set, is that we are naturally exercising cache destruction a lot more than we did before. So if there is any problem, either with this or anything related to cache destruction, it should at least show up a lot more frequently. So far, this does not seem to cause any problems.
We no longer hold the mutex the whole time after. See commit 210ed9d
("mm, slab: release slab_mutex earlier in kmem_cache_destroy()") for
details.