Re: [PATCHv4 18/24] thp, mm: split_huge_page(): caller need to lock page

[Kirill A. Shutemov]

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 07:40:29PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > We're going to use migration entries instead of compound_lock() to
> > stabilize page refcounts. Setup and remove migration entries require
> > page to be locked.
> >
> > Some of split_huge_page() callers already have the page locked. Let's
> > require everybody to lock the page before calling split_huge_page().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Why not have split_huge_page_locked/unlocked, and call the one which
> takes lock internally every where ?

We could do that, but it's not obvoius for me what is benefit. Couple of
lines on caller side?

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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/