Dave Hansen [off-list ref] writes:
On 6/19/21 1:18 AM, Huang, Ying wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
int next_demotion_node(int node)
{
- return node_demotion[node];
+ /*
+ * node_demotion[] is updated without excluding
+ * this function from running. READ_ONCE() avoids
+ * reading multiple, inconsistent 'node' values
+ * during an update.
+ */
+ return READ_ONCE(node_demotion[node]);
}
Is it necessary to have two separate patches to add node_demotion and
next_demotion_node() then modify it immediately? Maybe merge Patch 1 into 2?
Hmm, I just checked Patch 3 and it changes node_demotion again and uses RCU.
I guess it might be much simpler to just introduce node_demotion with RCU
in this patch and Patch 3 only takes care of hotplug events.
Hi, Dave,
What do you think about this?
Squashing them seems like a good idea to me.
Sure. Will do that. How about move RCU from 3/10 to the squashed one?
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying