All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
	Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] zram: remove workqueue for freeing removed pending slot
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 22:42:56 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140113194111.GA2322@swordfish> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1389611942-15544-7-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org>

On (01/13/14 20:19), Minchan Kim wrote:
> [1] introduced free request pending code to avoid scheduling
> by mutex under spinlock and it was a mess which made code
> lenghty and increased overhead.
> 
> Now, we don't need zram->lock any more to free slot so
> this patch reverts it and then, tb_lock should protect it.
> 
> [1] a0c516c, zram: don't grab mutex in zram_slot_free_noity
> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> ---
>  drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c | 54 +++++--------------------------------------
>  drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h | 10 --------
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> index 24e6426..f1a3c95 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> @@ -522,20 +522,6 @@ out:
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> -static void handle_pending_slot_free(struct zram *zram)
> -{
> -	struct zram_slot_free *free_rq;
> -
> -	spin_lock(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -	while (zram->slot_free_rq) {
> -		free_rq = zram->slot_free_rq;
> -		zram->slot_free_rq = free_rq->next;
> -		zram_free_page(zram, free_rq->index);
> -		kfree(free_rq);
> -	}
> -	spin_unlock(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -}
> -
>  static int zram_bvec_rw(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec, u32 index,
>  			int offset, struct bio *bio, int rw)
>  {
> @@ -547,7 +533,6 @@ static int zram_bvec_rw(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec, u32 index,
>  		up_read(&zram->lock);
>  	} else {
>  		down_write(&zram->lock);
> -		handle_pending_slot_free(zram);
>  		ret = zram_bvec_write(zram, bvec, index, offset);
>  		up_write(&zram->lock);
>  	}
> @@ -566,8 +551,6 @@ static void zram_reset_device(struct zram *zram, bool reset_capacity)
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> -	flush_work(&zram->free_work);
> -
>  	meta = zram->meta;
>  	zram->init_done = 0;
>  
> @@ -769,40 +752,19 @@ error:
>  	bio_io_error(bio);
>  }
>  
> -static void zram_slot_free(struct work_struct *work)
> -{
> -	struct zram *zram;
> -
> -	zram = container_of(work, struct zram, free_work);
> -	down_write(&zram->lock);
> -	handle_pending_slot_free(zram);
> -	up_write(&zram->lock);
> -}
> -
> -static void add_slot_free(struct zram *zram, struct zram_slot_free *free_rq)
> -{
> -	spin_lock(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -	free_rq->next = zram->slot_free_rq;
> -	zram->slot_free_rq = free_rq;
> -	spin_unlock(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -}
> -
>  static void zram_slot_free_notify(struct block_device *bdev,
>  				unsigned long index)
>  {
>  	struct zram *zram;
> -	struct zram_slot_free *free_rq;
> +	struct zram_meta *meta;
>  
>  	zram = bdev->bd_disk->private_data;
> -	atomic64_inc(&zram->stats.notify_free);
> -
> -	free_rq = kmalloc(sizeof(struct zram_slot_free), GFP_ATOMIC);
> -	if (!free_rq)
> -		return;
> +	meta = zram->meta;
>  
> -	free_rq->index = index;
> -	add_slot_free(zram, free_rq);
> -	schedule_work(&zram->free_work);
> +	write_lock(&meta->tb_lock);
> +	zram_free_page(zram, index);
> +	write_unlock(&meta->tb_lock);
> +	atomic64_inc(&zram->stats.notify_free);
>  }
>  

Hello Minchan,
I think we need to down_write init_lock in zram_slot_free_notify(),
and thus can avoid locking meta->tb_lock. otherwise, I think,
there is a chance that zram_slot_free_notify() can race with
device reset, e.g.
	
	zram_slot_free_notify()			zram_reset_device()
						down_write(&zram->init_lock);
	meta = zram->meta
						zram_meta_free(zram->meta);
						zram->meta = NULL;
	write_lock(&meta->tb_lock);
	[...]
	write_unlock(&meta->tb_lock);
						[..]
						up_write(&zram->init_lock);

	-ss

>  static const struct block_device_operations zram_devops = {
> @@ -849,10 +811,6 @@ static int create_device(struct zram *zram, int device_id)
>  	init_rwsem(&zram->lock);
>  	init_rwsem(&zram->init_lock);
>  
> -	INIT_WORK(&zram->free_work, zram_slot_free);
> -	spin_lock_init(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -	zram->slot_free_rq = NULL;
> -
>  	zram->queue = blk_alloc_queue(GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!zram->queue) {
>  		pr_err("Error allocating disk queue for device %d\n",
> diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h
> index c3f453f..d876300 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h
> @@ -90,20 +90,11 @@ struct zram_meta {
>  	struct zs_pool *mem_pool;
>  };
>  
> -struct zram_slot_free {
> -	unsigned long index;
> -	struct zram_slot_free *next;
> -};
> -
>  struct zram {
>  	struct zram_meta *meta;
>  	struct rw_semaphore lock; /* protect compression buffers,
>  				   * reads and writes
>  				   */
> -
> -	struct work_struct free_work;  /* handle pending free request */
> -	struct zram_slot_free *slot_free_rq; /* list head of free request */
> -
>  	struct request_queue *queue;
>  	struct gendisk *disk;
>  	int init_done;
> @@ -114,7 +105,6 @@ struct zram {
>  	 * we can store in a disk.
>  	 */
>  	u64 disksize;	/* bytes */
> -	spinlock_t slot_free_lock;
>  
>  	struct zram_stats stats;
>  };
> -- 
> 1.8.4.3
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2014-01-13 19:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-13 11:18 [PATCH 0/7] zram bug fix and lock redesign Minchan Kim
2014-01-13 11:18 ` [PATCH 1/7] zram: fix race between reset and flushing pending work Minchan Kim
2014-01-13 23:55   ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-14  0:15     ` Minchan Kim
2014-01-14  7:14     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2014-01-13 11:18 ` [PATCH 2/7] zram: delay pending free request in read path Minchan Kim
2014-01-13 11:18 ` [PATCH 3/7] zram: remove unnecessary free Minchan Kim
2014-01-13 11:18 ` [PATCH 4/7] zram: use atomic operation for stat Minchan Kim
2014-01-13 23:58   ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-14  0:19     ` Minchan Kim
2014-01-14  0:23       ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-14  0:38         ` Minchan Kim
2014-01-13 11:19 ` [PATCH 5/7] zram: introduce zram->tb_lock Minchan Kim
2014-01-13 11:19 ` [PATCH 6/7] zram: remove workqueue for freeing removed pending slot Minchan Kim
2014-01-13 19:42   ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2014-01-13 23:38     ` Minchan Kim
2014-01-14  7:09       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2014-01-13 11:19 ` [PATCH 7/7] zram: remove unnecessary lock Minchan Kim
2014-01-14  9:29   ` Jerome Marchand
2014-01-15  1:34     ` Minchan Kim

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=20140113194111.GA2322@swordfish \
    --to=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jmarchan@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=ngupta@vflare.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.