lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 1/9] mm/demotion: Add support for explicit memory tiers
From
On 6/8/22 11:40 AM, Ying Huang wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-06-08 at 10:07 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K V wrote:
>> On 6/8/22 12:13 AM, Tim Chen wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +static void memory_tier_device_release(struct device *dev)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct memory_tier *tier = to_memory_tier(dev);
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Do we need some ref counts on memory_tier?
>>> If there is another device still using the same memtier,
>>> free below could cause problem.
>>>
>>>> + kfree(tier);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>
>>> ...
>>
>> The lifecycle of the memory_tier struct is tied to the sysfs device life
>> time. ie, memory_tier_device_relese get called only after the last
>> reference on that sysfs dev object is released. Hence we can be sure
>> there is no userspace that is keeping one of the memtier related sysfs
>> file open.
>>
>> W.r.t other memory device sharing the same memtier, we unregister the
>> sysfs device only when the memory tier nodelist is empty. That is no
>> memory device is present in this memory tier.
>
> memory_tier isn't only used by user space. It is used inside kernel
> too. If some kernel code get a pointer to struct memory_tier, we need
> to guarantee the pointer will not be freed under us.

As mentioned above current patchset avoid doing that.

> And as Tim pointed
> out, we need to use it in hot path (for statistics), so some kind of rcu
> lock may be good.
>

Sure when those statistics code get added, we can add the relevant kref
and locking details.

-aneesh


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-08 10:51    [W:0.207 / U:21.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site