Re: [PATCH 00/13] Re: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc

[Nadia Derbey]

Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Nadia Derbey wrote:
>
> > Well, 1 interface changes, 1 is added and another one went away:
> >
> > 1) for the preload part (it becomes like the radix-tree preload part):
> >
> > int idr_pre_get(struct idr *, gfp_t);
> > would become
> > int idr_pre_get(gfp_t);
> Btw, that's one point I didn't understand about the idr code:
> Is it interrupt-safe? It uses spin_lock_irqsave and gfp_t, this implies 
> that it could be called from all contexts.
>
> But the prealloc made me a bit nervous: does it handle idr_pre_get(); 
> interrupt with another idr_pre_get(), add, pre_get_end, interrupt ends, 
> ... correctly?

I don't know if I'm answering your question, but after allocating, 
idr_pre_get() calls free_layer() which is the routine that inserts the 
allocated memory into the idr free list. And free_layer() calls 
spin_lock_ir_save() to protect this free list modification. So it should 
be safe?

> If it's only intended to be called from process context I would remove 
> the _irqsave and perhaps add an assert(!in_interrupt())

Well, I guess it might be called from any context, since the 
kmem_cache_alloc is called with the gfp_mask routine's parameter?


Regards,
Nadia
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/