Thread (26 messages) 26 messages, 7 authors, 2011-09-06

Re: [PATCH] memcg: remove unneeded preempt_disable

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2011-08-18 21:41:07
Also in: linux-arch, lkml

(cc linux-arch)

On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 23:50:53 -0700
Greg Thelen [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Both mem_cgroup_charge_statistics() and mem_cgroup_move_account() were
unnecessarily disabling preemption when adjusting per-cpu counters:
    preempt_disable()
    __this_cpu_xxx()
    __this_cpu_yyy()
    preempt_enable()

This change does not disable preemption and thus CPU switch is possible
within these routines.  This does not cause a problem because the total
of all cpu counters is summed when reporting stats.  Now both
mem_cgroup_charge_statistics() and mem_cgroup_move_account() look like:
    this_cpu_xxx()
    this_cpu_yyy()

...
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -664,24 +664,20 @@ static unsigned long mem_cgroup_read_events(struct mem_cgroup *mem,
 static void mem_cgroup_charge_statistics(struct mem_cgroup *mem,
 					 bool file, int nr_pages)
 {
-	preempt_disable();
-
 	if (file)
-		__this_cpu_add(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_CACHE], nr_pages);
+		this_cpu_add(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_CACHE], nr_pages);
 	else
-		__this_cpu_add(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_RSS], nr_pages);
+		this_cpu_add(mem->stat->count[MEM_CGROUP_STAT_RSS], nr_pages);
 
 	/* pagein of a big page is an event. So, ignore page size */
 	if (nr_pages > 0)
-		__this_cpu_inc(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_PGPGIN]);
+		this_cpu_inc(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_PGPGIN]);
 	else {
-		__this_cpu_inc(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_PGPGOUT]);
+		this_cpu_inc(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_PGPGOUT]);
 		nr_pages = -nr_pages; /* for event */
 	}
 
-	__this_cpu_add(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_COUNT], nr_pages);
-
-	preempt_enable();
+	this_cpu_add(mem->stat->events[MEM_CGROUP_EVENTS_COUNT], nr_pages);
 }
On non-x86 architectures this_cpu_add() internally does
preempt_disable() and preempt_enable().  So the patch is a small
optimisation for x86 and a larger deoptimisation for non-x86.

I think I'll apply it, as the call frequency is low (correct?) and the
problem will correct itself as other architectures implement their
atomic this_cpu_foo() operations.

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help