lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: use in_atomic() in print_vma_addr()
On Fri 03-11-17 01:44:44, Yang Shi wrote:
>
>
> On 11/2/17 12:57 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 02-11-17 05:38:33, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > commit 3e51f3c4004c9b01f66da03214a3e206f5ed627b
> > > ("sched/preempt: Remove PREEMPT_ACTIVE unmasking off in_atomic()") makes
> > > in_atomic() just check the preempt count, so it is not necessary to use
> > > preempt_count() in print_vma_addr() any more. Replace preempt_count() to
> > > in_atomic() which is a generic API for checking atomic context.
> >
> > But why? Is there some general work to get rid of the direct preempt_count
> > usage outside of the generic API?
>
> I may not articulate it in the commit log, I would say "in_atomic" is
> *preferred* API for checking atomic context instead of preempt_count() which
> should be used for retrieving the preemption count value.
>
> I would say there is not such general elimination work undergoing right now,
> but if we go through the kernel code, almost everywhere "in_atomic" is used
> for such use case already, except two places:
>
> - print_vma_addr()
> - debug_smp_processor_id()
>
> Both came from Ingo long time ago before commit
> 3e51f3c4004c9b01f66da03214a3e206f5ed627b ("sched/preempt: Remove
> PREEMPT_ACTIVE unmasking off in_atomic()"). But, after this commit was
> merged, I don't see why *not* use in_atomic() to follow the convention.

OK.

Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>
> Thanks,
> Yang
>
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.s@alibaba-inc.com>
> > > ---
> > > mm/memory.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> > > index a728bed..19b684e 100644
> > > --- a/mm/memory.c
> > > +++ b/mm/memory.c
> > > @@ -4460,7 +4460,7 @@ void print_vma_addr(char *prefix, unsigned long ip)
> > > * Do not print if we are in atomic
> > > * contexts (in exception stacks, etc.):
> > > */
> > > - if (preempt_count())
> > > + if (in_atomic())
> > > return;
> > > down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> > > --
> > > 1.8.3.1
> >
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-03 09:30    [W:0.074 / U:0.428 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site