From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kernel.2@gmail.com>
To: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@darnok.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] zram: Fix deadlock bug in partial write
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:20:20 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130122151808.GA3757@blaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50FE6025.2080609@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:47:17AM +0100, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> On 01/22/2013 01:07 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Now zram allocates new page with GFP_KERNEL in zram I/O path
> > if IO is partial. Unfortunately, It may cuase deadlock with
> > reclaim path so this patch solves the problem.
> >
> > Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
> > Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >
> > We could use GFP_IO instead of GFP_ATOMIC in zram_bvec_read with
> > some modification related to buffer allocation in case of partial IO.
> > But it needs more churn and prevent merge this patch into stable
> > if we should send this to stable so I'd like to keep it as simple
> > as possbile. GFP_IO usage could be separate patch after we merge it.
> > Thanks.
>
> I'd rather have a preallocated buffer for that. It would make
> zram_bvec_read/write() simpler (no need to deal with an allocation
> failure or to free the buffer) and it would be consistent with the way
> other similar buffer works (compress_workmem/buffer).
Consistent? Other buffers are MUST for zram working while the buffer
for partial I/O is supplement. Although partial I/O might be common in your config,
it doesn't match with my usecase. I didn't see any partial IO in my usecase.
Nontheless, why should I pay free 4K? Because of just making code SIMPLE?
I don't think current alloc/free handling about partial I/O is mess at the cost
of 4K. And we could use a few zram(a swap and a 2-compressed tmpfs) in system
so the cost is n*4K. Please keep in mind that ZRAM's goal is memory efficiency
and have used in many embedded system which they are always trying to save
just hundred byte.
>
> Jerome
>
> >
> > drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
> > index 61fb8f1..b285b3a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
> > @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ static int zram_bvec_read(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec,
> > user_mem = kmap_atomic(page);
> > if (is_partial_io(bvec))
> > /* Use a temporary buffer to decompress the page */
> > - uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > else
> > uncmem = user_mem;
> >
> > @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int zram_bvec_write(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec, u32 index,
> > * This is a partial IO. We need to read the full page
> > * before to write the changes.
> > */
> > - uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_NOIO);
> > if (!uncmem) {
> > pr_info("Error allocating temp memory!\n");
> > ret = -ENOMEM;
> >
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kernel.2@gmail.com>
To: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@darnok.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] zram: Fix deadlock bug in partial write
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:20:20 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130122151808.GA3757@blaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50FE6025.2080609@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:47:17AM +0100, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> On 01/22/2013 01:07 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Now zram allocates new page with GFP_KERNEL in zram I/O path
> > if IO is partial. Unfortunately, It may cuase deadlock with
> > reclaim path so this patch solves the problem.
> >
> > Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
> > Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >
> > We could use GFP_IO instead of GFP_ATOMIC in zram_bvec_read with
> > some modification related to buffer allocation in case of partial IO.
> > But it needs more churn and prevent merge this patch into stable
> > if we should send this to stable so I'd like to keep it as simple
> > as possbile. GFP_IO usage could be separate patch after we merge it.
> > Thanks.
>
> I'd rather have a preallocated buffer for that. It would make
> zram_bvec_read/write() simpler (no need to deal with an allocation
> failure or to free the buffer) and it would be consistent with the way
> other similar buffer works (compress_workmem/buffer).
Consistent? Other buffers are MUST for zram working while the buffer
for partial I/O is supplement. Although partial I/O might be common in your config,
it doesn't match with my usecase. I didn't see any partial IO in my usecase.
Nontheless, why should I pay free 4K? Because of just making code SIMPLE?
I don't think current alloc/free handling about partial I/O is mess at the cost
of 4K. And we could use a few zram(a swap and a 2-compressed tmpfs) in system
so the cost is n*4K. Please keep in mind that ZRAM's goal is memory efficiency
and have used in many embedded system which they are always trying to save
just hundred byte.
>
> Jerome
>
> >
> > drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
> > index 61fb8f1..b285b3a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
> > @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ static int zram_bvec_read(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec,
> > user_mem = kmap_atomic(page);
> > if (is_partial_io(bvec))
> > /* Use a temporary buffer to decompress the page */
> > - uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > else
> > uncmem = user_mem;
> >
> > @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int zram_bvec_write(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec, u32 index,
> > * This is a partial IO. We need to read the full page
> > * before to write the changes.
> > */
> > - uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_NOIO);
> > if (!uncmem) {
> > pr_info("Error allocating temp memory!\n");
> > ret = -ENOMEM;
> >
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-22 15:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-22 0:07 [PATCH v4 1/4] zram: Fix deadlock bug in partial write Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] zram: force disksize setting before using zram Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] zram: give up lazy initialization of zram metadata Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] zram: get rid of lockdep warning Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 9:47 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] zram: Fix deadlock bug in partial write Jerome Marchand
2013-01-22 9:47 ` Jerome Marchand
2013-01-22 15:20 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2013-01-22 15:20 ` Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 18:02 ` Nitin Gupta
2013-01-22 18:02 ` Nitin Gupta
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=20130122151808.GA3757@blaptop \
--to=minchan.kernel.2@gmail.com \
--cc=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jmarchan@redhat.com \
--cc=konrad@darnok.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ngupta@vflare.org \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.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.