All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: nborisov@suse.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jack@suse.cz, jbacik@fb.com,
	jlayton@redhat.com, mgorman@techsingularity.net, tj@kernel.org,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "writeback: rework wb_[dec|inc]_stat family of functions" has been added to the 4.12-stable tree
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 08:18:38 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <150099591819099@kroah.com> (raw)


This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    writeback: rework wb_[dec|inc]_stat family of functions

to the 4.12-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     writeback-rework-wb__stat-family-of-functions.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.12 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From 3e8f399da490e6ac20a3cfd6aa404c9aa961a9a2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 14:37:51 -0700
Subject: writeback: rework wb_[dec|inc]_stat family of functions

From: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>

commit 3e8f399da490e6ac20a3cfd6aa404c9aa961a9a2 upstream.

Currently the writeback statistics code uses a percpu counters to hold
various statistics.  Furthermore we have 2 families of functions - those
which disable local irq and those which doesn't and whose names begin
with double underscore.  However, they both end up calling
__add_wb_stats which in turn calls percpu_counter_add_batch which is
already irq-safe.

Exploiting this fact allows to eliminated the __wb_* functions since
they don't add any further protection than we already have.
Furthermore, refactor the wb_* function to call __add_wb_stat directly
without the irq-disabling dance.  This will likely result in better
runtime of code which deals with modifying the stat counters.

While at it also document why percpu_counter_add_batch is in fact
preempt and irq-safe since at least 3 people got confused.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1498029937-27293-1-git-send-email-nborisov@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
 fs/fs-writeback.c           |    8 ++++----
 include/linux/backing-dev.h |   24 ++----------------------
 lib/percpu_counter.c        |    7 +++++++
 mm/page-writeback.c         |   10 +++++-----
 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
+++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
@@ -380,8 +380,8 @@ static void inode_switch_wbs_work_fn(str
 		struct page *page = radix_tree_deref_slot_protected(slot,
 							&mapping->tree_lock);
 		if (likely(page) && PageDirty(page)) {
-			__dec_wb_stat(old_wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
-			__inc_wb_stat(new_wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
+			dec_wb_stat(old_wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
+			inc_wb_stat(new_wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
 		}
 	}
 
@@ -391,8 +391,8 @@ static void inode_switch_wbs_work_fn(str
 							&mapping->tree_lock);
 		if (likely(page)) {
 			WARN_ON_ONCE(!PageWriteback(page));
-			__dec_wb_stat(old_wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
-			__inc_wb_stat(new_wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
+			dec_wb_stat(old_wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
+			inc_wb_stat(new_wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
 		}
 	}
 
--- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h
+++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h
@@ -69,34 +69,14 @@ static inline void __add_wb_stat(struct
 	percpu_counter_add_batch(&wb->stat[item], amount, WB_STAT_BATCH);
 }
 
-static inline void __inc_wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb,
-				 enum wb_stat_item item)
-{
-	__add_wb_stat(wb, item, 1);
-}
-
 static inline void inc_wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb, enum wb_stat_item item)
 {
-	unsigned long flags;
-
-	local_irq_save(flags);
-	__inc_wb_stat(wb, item);
-	local_irq_restore(flags);
-}
-
-static inline void __dec_wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb,
-				 enum wb_stat_item item)
-{
-	__add_wb_stat(wb, item, -1);
+	__add_wb_stat(wb, item, 1);
 }
 
 static inline void dec_wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb, enum wb_stat_item item)
 {
-	unsigned long flags;
-
-	local_irq_save(flags);
-	__dec_wb_stat(wb, item);
-	local_irq_restore(flags);
+	__add_wb_stat(wb, item, -1);
 }
 
 static inline s64 wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb, enum wb_stat_item item)
--- a/lib/percpu_counter.c
+++ b/lib/percpu_counter.c
@@ -72,6 +72,13 @@ void percpu_counter_set(struct percpu_co
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(percpu_counter_set);
 
+/**
+ * This function is both preempt and irq safe. The former is due to explicit
+ * preemption disable. The latter is guaranteed by the fact that the slow path
+ * is explicitly protected by an irq-safe spinlock whereas the fast patch uses
+ * this_cpu_add which is irq-safe by definition. Hence there is no need muck
+ * with irq state before calling this one
+ */
 void percpu_counter_add_batch(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount, s32 batch)
 {
 	s64 count;
--- a/mm/page-writeback.c
+++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
@@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ static inline void __wb_writeout_inc(str
 {
 	struct wb_domain *cgdom;
 
-	__inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_WRITTEN);
+	inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_WRITTEN);
 	wb_domain_writeout_inc(&global_wb_domain, &wb->completions,
 			       wb->bdi->max_prop_frac);
 
@@ -2437,8 +2437,8 @@ void account_page_dirtied(struct page *p
 		__inc_node_page_state(page, NR_FILE_DIRTY);
 		__inc_zone_page_state(page, NR_ZONE_WRITE_PENDING);
 		__inc_node_page_state(page, NR_DIRTIED);
-		__inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
-		__inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_DIRTIED);
+		inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
+		inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_DIRTIED);
 		task_io_account_write(PAGE_SIZE);
 		current->nr_dirtied++;
 		this_cpu_inc(bdp_ratelimits);
@@ -2745,7 +2745,7 @@ int test_clear_page_writeback(struct pag
 			if (bdi_cap_account_writeback(bdi)) {
 				struct bdi_writeback *wb = inode_to_wb(inode);
 
-				__dec_wb_stat(wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
+				dec_wb_stat(wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
 				__wb_writeout_inc(wb);
 			}
 		}
@@ -2791,7 +2791,7 @@ int __test_set_page_writeback(struct pag
 						page_index(page),
 						PAGECACHE_TAG_WRITEBACK);
 			if (bdi_cap_account_writeback(bdi))
-				__inc_wb_stat(inode_to_wb(inode), WB_WRITEBACK);
+				inc_wb_stat(inode_to_wb(inode), WB_WRITEBACK);
 
 			/*
 			 * We can come through here when swapping anonymous


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from nborisov@suse.com are

queue-4.12/percpu_counter-rename-__percpu_counter_add-to-percpu_counter_add_batch.patch
queue-4.12/writeback-rework-wb__stat-family-of-functions.patch

                 reply	other threads:[~2017-07-25 15:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=150099591819099@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jbacik@fb.com \
    --cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=nborisov@suse.com \
    --cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.