Re: Why kmem_cache_free occupy CPU for more than 10 seconds?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 15:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:

> There used to be a cond_resched() in invalidate_mapping_pages() which would
> have prevented this, but I rudely removed it to support
> /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches (which needs to call invalidate_inode_pages()
> under spinlock).
> 
> We could resurrect that cond_resched() by passing in some flag, I guess. 
> Or change the code to poke the softlockup detector.  The former would be
> better.

cond_resched() is conditional on __resched_legal(0), which should take
care of being called under a spinlock.

so I guess we can just reinstate the call in invalidate_mapping_pages()

(still waiting on the compile to finish...)
---
invalidate_mapping_pages() is called under locks (usually preemptable)
but can do a _lot_ of work, stick in a voluntary preemption point to
avoid excessive latencies (over 10 seconds was reported by softlockup).

Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
---
 mm/truncate.c |    2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Index: linux-2.6-mm/mm/truncate.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-mm.orig/mm/truncate.c
+++ linux-2.6-mm/mm/truncate.c
@@ -292,6 +292,8 @@ unsigned long invalidate_mapping_pages(s
 			pgoff_t index;
 			int lock_failed;
 
+			cond_resched();
+
 			lock_failed = TestSetPageLocked(page);
 
 			/*


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux