Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | <> | Subject | [PATCH] mm/slub: make add_full() condition more explicit | Date | Tue, 11 Aug 2020 10:02:36 +0800 |
| |
From: Abel Wu <wuyun.wu@huawei.com>
The commit below is incomplete, as it didn't handle the add_full() part. commit a4d3f8916c65 ("slub: remove useless kmem_cache_debug() before remove_full()")
This patch checks for SLAB_STORE_USER instead of kmem_cache_debug(), since that should be the only context in which we need the list_lock for add_full().
Signed-off-by: Abel Wu <wuyun.wu@huawei.com> --- mm/slub.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c index f226d66408ee..df93a5a0e9a4 100644 --- a/mm/slub.c +++ b/mm/slub.c @@ -2182,7 +2182,8 @@ static void deactivate_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page, } } else { m = M_FULL; - if (kmem_cache_debug(s) && !lock) { +#ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG + if ((s->flags & SLAB_STORE_USER) && !lock) { lock = 1; /* * This also ensures that the scanning of full @@ -2191,6 +2192,7 @@ static void deactivate_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page, */ spin_lock(&n->list_lock); } +#endif } if (l != m) { -- 2.28.0.windows.1
| |