Re: [RFC 0/2] Reenable might_sleep() checks for might_fault() when atomic
From: Thomas Gleixner
Date: Thu Nov 27 2014 - 16:52:24 EST
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > OTOH, there is no reason why we need to disable preemption over that
> > page_fault_disabled() region. There are code pathes which really do
> > not require to disable preemption for that.
> > We have that seperated in preempt-rt for obvious reasons and IIRC
> > Peter Zijlstra tried to distangle it in mainline some time ago. I
> > forgot why that never got merged.
> Of course, we can completely separate that in our page fault code by doing
> pagefault_disabled() checks instead of in_atomic() checks (even in add on
> patches later).
> > We tie way too much stuff on the preemption count already, which is a
> > mightmare because we have no clear distinction of protection
> > scopes.
> Although it might not be optimal, but keeping a separate counter for
> pagefault_disable() as part of the preemption counter seems to be the only
> doable thing right now.
It needs to be seperate, if it should be useful. Otherwise we just
have a extra accounting in preempt_count() which does exactly the same
thing as we have now: disabling preemption.
Now you might say, that we could mask out that part when checking
preempt_count, but that wont work on x86 as x86 has the preempt
counter as a per cpu variable and not as a per thread one.
But if you want to distangle pagefault disable from preempt disable
then you must move it to the thread, because it is a property of the
thread. preempt count is very much a per cpu counter as you can only
go through schedule when it becomes 0.
Btw, I find the x86 representation way more clear, because it
documents that preempt count is a per cpu BKL and not a magic thread
property. And sadly that is how preempt count is used ...
> I am not sure if a completely separated counter is even possible,
> increasing the size of thread_info.
And adding a ulong to thread_info is going to create exactly which
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/