From: Roman Gushchin <[email protected]>

commit 63b02ef7dc4ec239df45c018ac0adbd02ba30a0c upstream

Currently the memcg_params.dying flag and the corresponding workqueue used
for the asynchronous deactivation of kmem_caches is synchronized using the
slab_mutex.

It makes impossible to check this flag from the irq context, which will be
required in order to implement asynchronous release of kmem_caches.

So let's switch over to the irq-save flavor of the spinlock-based
synchronization.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Vladimir Davydov <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <[email protected]>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <[email protected]>
Cc: Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
Cc: Waiman Long <[email protected]>
Cc: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <[email protected]>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrei Vagin <[email protected]>
Cc: Qian Cai <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Zhang Xiao <[email protected]>
---
 mm/slab_common.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
index 0d247ef3057b..1815e9fe02b8 100644
--- a/mm/slab_common.c
+++ b/mm/slab_common.c
@@ -130,6 +130,7 @@ int __kmem_cache_alloc_bulk(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t 
flags, size_t nr,
 #ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
 
 LIST_HEAD(slab_root_caches);
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(memcg_kmem_wq_lock);
 
 void slab_init_memcg_params(struct kmem_cache *s)
 {
@@ -752,14 +753,24 @@ void slab_deactivate_memcg_cache_rcu_sched(struct 
kmem_cache *s,
            WARN_ON_ONCE(s->memcg_params.deact_fn))
                return;
 
+       /*
+        * memcg_kmem_wq_lock is used to synchronize memcg_params.dying
+        * flag and make sure that no new kmem_cache deactivation tasks
+        * are queued (see flush_memcg_workqueue() ).
+        */
+       spin_lock_irq(&memcg_kmem_wq_lock);
+
        if (s->memcg_params.root_cache->memcg_params.dying)
-               return;
+               goto unlock;
 
        /* pin memcg so that @s doesn't get destroyed in the middle */
        css_get(&s->memcg_params.memcg->css);
 
        s->memcg_params.deact_fn = deact_fn;
        call_rcu(&s->memcg_params.deact_rcu_head, kmemcg_deactivate_rcufn);
+
+unlock:
+       spin_unlock_irq(&memcg_kmem_wq_lock);
 }
 
 void memcg_deactivate_kmem_caches(struct mem_cgroup *memcg)
@@ -869,9 +880,9 @@ static int shutdown_memcg_caches(struct kmem_cache *s)
 
 static void memcg_set_kmem_cache_dying(struct kmem_cache *s)
 {
-       mutex_lock(&slab_mutex);
+       spin_lock_irq(&memcg_kmem_wq_lock);
        s->memcg_params.dying = true;
-       mutex_unlock(&slab_mutex);
+       spin_unlock_irq(&memcg_kmem_wq_lock);
 }
 
 static void flush_memcg_workqueue(struct kmem_cache *s)
-- 
2.17.1

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#8996): 
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/linux-yocto/message/8996
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/76447284/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/linux-yocto/unsub  
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to