On Wed 03-03-21 09:59:45, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 09:03:27AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > Paul what is the current plan with in_atomic to be usable for !PREEMPT > > configurations? > > Ah, thank you for the reminder! I have rebased that series on top of > v5.12-rc1 on -rcu branch tglx-pc.2021.03.03a. > > The current state is that Linus is not convinced that this change is > worthwhile given that only RCU and printk() want it. (BPF would use > it if it were available, but is willing to live without it, at least in > the short term.) > > But maybe Linus will be convinced given your additional use case. > Here is hoping!
Yes, hugetlb freeing path would benefit from this. You can reference this lockdep report (http://lkml.kernel.org/r/000000000000f1c03b05bc43a...@google.com) with an additional argument that making hugetlb_lock irq safe is a larger undertaking and we will need something reasonably backportable for older kernels as well. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
