All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 7/7] zsmalloc: use shrinker to trigger auto-compaction
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 12:04:10 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150708030410.GA873@blaptop.AC68U> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150708021836.GA1520@swordfish>

Hi Sergey,

On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 11:18:36AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (07/08/15 00:12), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > I don't think it would fail in *real practice*.
> > > Althout it might happen, what does zram could help in that cases?
> > > 
> > 
> > This argument depends on the current register_shrinker() implementation,
> > should some one add additional return branch there and it's done.
> > 
> > > If it were failed, it means there is already little memory on the system
> > > so zram could not be helpful for those environment.
> > > IOW, zram should be enabled earlier.
> > > 
> > > If you want it strongly, please reproduce such failing and prove that
> > > zram was helpful for the system.
> > 
> > No, thanks. I'll just remove it.
> > 
> 
> hm... This makes error path a bit ugly. What we have now is
> pretty straight forward
> 
> ... zs_create_pool(char *name, gfp_t flags)
> {
> 	..
> 	if (zs_register_shrinker(pool) == 0)
> 		pool->shrinker_enabled = true;
> 	..
> err:
> 	zs_destroy_pool(pool);
> 	return NULL;
> }
> 
> zs_destroy_pool() does a destruction. It performs unconditional
> zs_unregister_shrinker(), which does unregister_shrinker() _if needed_.
> 
> Shrinker API does not handle nicely unregister_shrinker() on a not-registered
> ->shrinker. And error path can be triggered even before we do register_shrinker(),
> so we can't 'fix' unregister_shrinker() in a common way, doing something like
> 
>  void unregister_shrinker(struct shrinker *shrinker)
>  {
> +       if (!unlikely(shrinker->nr_deferred))
> +               return;
> +
>         down_write(&shrinker_rwsem);
>         list_del(&shrinker->list);
>         up_write(&shrinker_rwsem);
> 
> 
> (just for example), because someone can accidentally pass a dirty (not zeroed
> out) `struct shrinker'. e.g.
> 
> struct foo {
> 	const char *b;
> ...
> 	struct shrinker s;
> };
> 
> void bar(void)
> {
> 	struct foo *f = kmalloc(...);
> 
> 	if (!f)
> 		return;
> 
> 	f->a = kmalloc(...);
> 	if (!f->a)
> 		goto err;
> 
> err:
> 	unregister_shrinker(f->s);
> 			^^^^^^ boom
> 	...
> }
> 
> 

Yes, it's ugly.

> 
> So... options:
> 
> (a) we need something to signify that zs_unregister_shrinker() was successful

I think a) is simple way to handle it now.
I don't want to stuck with this issue.

Please comment out why we need such boolean so after someone who has interest
on shrinker clean-up is able to grab a chance.

Thanks!

> 
> or
> 
> (b) factor out 'core' part of zs_destroy_pool() and do a full destruction when
> called from the outside (from zram for example), or a partial destruction when
> called from zs_create_pool() error path.
> 
> 
> 
> or
> 
> (c) introduce INIT_SHRINKER macro to init `struct shrinker' internal
> members
> 
> (!!! composed in email client, not tested !!!)
> 
> include/linux/shrinker.h
> 
> #define INIT_SHRINKER(s)			\
> 	do {					\
> 		(s)->nr_deferred = NULL;	\
> 		INIT_LIST_HEAD(&(s)->list);	\
> 	} while (0)
> 
> 
> and do
> 
> struct zs_pool *zs_create_pool(char *name, gfp_t flags)
> {
> 	..
> 	INIT_SHRINKER(&pool->shrinker);
> 
> 	pool->name = kstrdup(name, GFP_KERNEL);
> 	..
> }
> 
> 
> 
> Looking at shrinker users, they all have to carry on some sort of
> a flag telling that "unregister_shrinker()" will not blow up... or
> just be fishy... like
> 
>  int ldlm_pools_init(void)
>  {
>          int rc;
> 
>          rc = ldlm_pools_thread_start();
>          if (rc == 0) {
>                  register_shrinker(&ldlm_pools_srv_shrinker);
>                  register_shrinker(&ldlm_pools_cli_shrinker);
>          }
>          return rc;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ldlm_pools_init);
> 
>  void ldlm_pools_fini(void)
>  {
>          unregister_shrinker(&ldlm_pools_srv_shrinker);
>          unregister_shrinker(&ldlm_pools_cli_shrinker);
>          ldlm_pools_thread_stop();
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ldlm_pools_fini);
> 
> 
> 
> or access private members of the `struct shrinker', like
> 
> 
> struct cache_set {
> ...
> 	struct shrinker		shrink;
> ...
> };
> 
>  void bch_btree_cache_free(struct cache_set *c)
>  {
>          struct btree *b;
>          struct closure cl;
>          closure_init_stack(&cl);
> 
>          if (c->shrink.list.next)
>                  unregister_shrinker(&c->shrink);
> 
> 
> Note that `shrink.list.next' check.
> 
> 	-ss

-- 
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.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 7/7] zsmalloc: use shrinker to trigger auto-compaction
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 12:04:10 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150708030410.GA873@blaptop.AC68U> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150708021836.GA1520@swordfish>

Hi Sergey,

On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 11:18:36AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (07/08/15 00:12), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > > I don't think it would fail in *real practice*.
> > > Althout it might happen, what does zram could help in that cases?
> > > 
> > 
> > This argument depends on the current register_shrinker() implementation,
> > should some one add additional return branch there and it's done.
> > 
> > > If it were failed, it means there is already little memory on the system
> > > so zram could not be helpful for those environment.
> > > IOW, zram should be enabled earlier.
> > > 
> > > If you want it strongly, please reproduce such failing and prove that
> > > zram was helpful for the system.
> > 
> > No, thanks. I'll just remove it.
> > 
> 
> hm... This makes error path a bit ugly. What we have now is
> pretty straight forward
> 
> ... zs_create_pool(char *name, gfp_t flags)
> {
> 	..
> 	if (zs_register_shrinker(pool) == 0)
> 		pool->shrinker_enabled = true;
> 	..
> err:
> 	zs_destroy_pool(pool);
> 	return NULL;
> }
> 
> zs_destroy_pool() does a destruction. It performs unconditional
> zs_unregister_shrinker(), which does unregister_shrinker() _if needed_.
> 
> Shrinker API does not handle nicely unregister_shrinker() on a not-registered
> ->shrinker. And error path can be triggered even before we do register_shrinker(),
> so we can't 'fix' unregister_shrinker() in a common way, doing something like
> 
>  void unregister_shrinker(struct shrinker *shrinker)
>  {
> +       if (!unlikely(shrinker->nr_deferred))
> +               return;
> +
>         down_write(&shrinker_rwsem);
>         list_del(&shrinker->list);
>         up_write(&shrinker_rwsem);
> 
> 
> (just for example), because someone can accidentally pass a dirty (not zeroed
> out) `struct shrinker'. e.g.
> 
> struct foo {
> 	const char *b;
> ...
> 	struct shrinker s;
> };
> 
> void bar(void)
> {
> 	struct foo *f = kmalloc(...);
> 
> 	if (!f)
> 		return;
> 
> 	f->a = kmalloc(...);
> 	if (!f->a)
> 		goto err;
> 
> err:
> 	unregister_shrinker(f->s);
> 			^^^^^^ boom
> 	...
> }
> 
> 

Yes, it's ugly.

> 
> So... options:
> 
> (a) we need something to signify that zs_unregister_shrinker() was successful

I think a) is simple way to handle it now.
I don't want to stuck with this issue.

Please comment out why we need such boolean so after someone who has interest
on shrinker clean-up is able to grab a chance.

Thanks!

> 
> or
> 
> (b) factor out 'core' part of zs_destroy_pool() and do a full destruction when
> called from the outside (from zram for example), or a partial destruction when
> called from zs_create_pool() error path.
> 
> 
> 
> or
> 
> (c) introduce INIT_SHRINKER macro to init `struct shrinker' internal
> members
> 
> (!!! composed in email client, not tested !!!)
> 
> include/linux/shrinker.h
> 
> #define INIT_SHRINKER(s)			\
> 	do {					\
> 		(s)->nr_deferred = NULL;	\
> 		INIT_LIST_HEAD(&(s)->list);	\
> 	} while (0)
> 
> 
> and do
> 
> struct zs_pool *zs_create_pool(char *name, gfp_t flags)
> {
> 	..
> 	INIT_SHRINKER(&pool->shrinker);
> 
> 	pool->name = kstrdup(name, GFP_KERNEL);
> 	..
> }
> 
> 
> 
> Looking at shrinker users, they all have to carry on some sort of
> a flag telling that "unregister_shrinker()" will not blow up... or
> just be fishy... like
> 
>  int ldlm_pools_init(void)
>  {
>          int rc;
> 
>          rc = ldlm_pools_thread_start();
>          if (rc == 0) {
>                  register_shrinker(&ldlm_pools_srv_shrinker);
>                  register_shrinker(&ldlm_pools_cli_shrinker);
>          }
>          return rc;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ldlm_pools_init);
> 
>  void ldlm_pools_fini(void)
>  {
>          unregister_shrinker(&ldlm_pools_srv_shrinker);
>          unregister_shrinker(&ldlm_pools_cli_shrinker);
>          ldlm_pools_thread_stop();
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ldlm_pools_fini);
> 
> 
> 
> or access private members of the `struct shrinker', like
> 
> 
> struct cache_set {
> ...
> 	struct shrinker		shrink;
> ...
> };
> 
>  void bch_btree_cache_free(struct cache_set *c)
>  {
>          struct btree *b;
>          struct closure cl;
>          closure_init_stack(&cl);
> 
>          if (c->shrink.list.next)
>                  unregister_shrinker(&c->shrink);
> 
> 
> Note that `shrink.list.next' check.
> 
> 	-ss

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim

  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-08  3:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-07 11:56 [PATCH v6 0/7] mm/zsmalloc: introduce automatic pool compaction Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 1/7] zsmalloc: drop unused variable `nr_to_migrate' Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 2/7] zsmalloc: always keep per-class stats Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 3/7] zsmalloc: introduce zs_can_compact() function Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 13:21   ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 13:21     ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 4/7] zsmalloc: cosmetic compaction code adjustments Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56 ` [PATCH v6 5/7] zsmalloc/zram: introduce zs_pool_stats api Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:56   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 13:36   ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 13:36     ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 14:32     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 14:32       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 14:48       ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 14:48         ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 15:02         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 15:02           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v6 6/7] zsmalloc: account the number of compacted pages Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:57   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 13:39   ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 13:39     ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 14:21     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 14:21       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 14:33       ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 14:33         ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 11:57 ` [PATCH v6 7/7] zsmalloc: use shrinker to trigger auto-compaction Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 11:57   ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 13:44   ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 13:44     ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 14:41     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 14:41       ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 15:01       ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 15:01         ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-07 15:12         ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-07 15:12           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-08  2:18           ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-08  2:18             ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-08  3:04             ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2015-07-08  3:04               ` Minchan Kim
2015-07-08  3:49               ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-07-08  3:49                 ` Sergey Senozhatsky

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=20150708030410.GA873@blaptop.AC68U \
    --to=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    /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.