lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [rfc/patch] mm/slub: restore/expand unfreeze_partials() local exclusion scope
From
Date
On Sun, 2021-07-25 at 16:16 +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 7/25/21 4:09 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Sat, 2021-07-24 at 00:39 +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > >
> > > If not, then I would expect this to work (I don't think they ever nest
> > > in the opposite order, also lockdep should tell us instead of
> > > -ENOBOOT?), but might be missing something...
> >
> > Yeah, like #ifndef CONFIG_PREMPT_RT at the bottom of the loop that our
> > useless damn eyeballs auto-correct instead of reporting :)
>
> Well doh, good catch.

I never did see it. I got sick of saying "but but but", and did make
mm/slub.i, which made it glow.

> Hope fixing that helps then?

Yeah, though RT should perhaps be pinned across release/re-acquire?

Actually, local locks should rediscover the recursion handling skills
they long had so such RT specific hole poking isn't necessary. There
previously would have been no ifdef+typo there for eyeballs to miss and
miss and miss.

-Mike

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-25 17:02    [W:0.141 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site