All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Cedric Blancher <cedric.blancher@gmail.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Another proposal for DAX fault locking
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 08:19:22 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160210081922.GC4763@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALXu0Udxe4W9XRaCu=TOa5HE9bHtNcHBeFT6iiXmgUDOJh7iZA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 07:46:05PM +0100, Cedric Blancher wrote:
> On 9 February 2016 at 18:24, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was thinking about current issues with DAX fault locking [1] (data
> > corruption due to racing faults allocating blocks) and also races which
> > currently don't allow us to clear dirty tags in the radix tree due to races
> > between faults and cache flushing [2]. Both of these exist because we don't
> > have an equivalent of page lock available for DAX. While we have a
> > reasonable solution available for problem [1], so far I'm not aware of a
> > decent solution for [2]. After briefly discussing the issue with Mel he had
> > a bright idea that we could used hashed locks to deal with [2] (and I think
> > we can solve [1] with them as well). So my proposal looks as follows:
> >
> > DAX will have an array of mutexes
> 
> One folly here: Arrays of mutexes NEVER work unless you manage to
> align them to occupy one complete L2/L3 cache line each. Otherwise the
> CPUS will fight over cache lines each time they touch (read or write)
> a mutex, and it then becomes a O^n-like scalability problem if
> multiple mutexes occupy one cache line. It becomes WORSE as more
> mutexes fit into a single cache line and even more worse with the
> number of CPUS accessing such contested lines.
> 

That is a *potential* performance concern although I agree with you in that
mutex's false sharing a cache line would be a problem. However, it is a
performance concern that potentially is alleviated by alternative hashing
where as AFAIK the issues being faced currently are data corruption and
functional issues. I'd take a performance issue over a data corruption
issue any day of the week.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

--
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: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Cedric Blancher <cedric.blancher@gmail.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org, Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: Another proposal for DAX fault locking
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 08:19:22 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160210081922.GC4763@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALXu0Udxe4W9XRaCu=TOa5HE9bHtNcHBeFT6iiXmgUDOJh7iZA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 07:46:05PM +0100, Cedric Blancher wrote:
> On 9 February 2016 at 18:24, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was thinking about current issues with DAX fault locking [1] (data
> > corruption due to racing faults allocating blocks) and also races which
> > currently don't allow us to clear dirty tags in the radix tree due to races
> > between faults and cache flushing [2]. Both of these exist because we don't
> > have an equivalent of page lock available for DAX. While we have a
> > reasonable solution available for problem [1], so far I'm not aware of a
> > decent solution for [2]. After briefly discussing the issue with Mel he had
> > a bright idea that we could used hashed locks to deal with [2] (and I think
> > we can solve [1] with them as well). So my proposal looks as follows:
> >
> > DAX will have an array of mutexes
> 
> One folly here: Arrays of mutexes NEVER work unless you manage to
> align them to occupy one complete L2/L3 cache line each. Otherwise the
> CPUS will fight over cache lines each time they touch (read or write)
> a mutex, and it then becomes a O^n-like scalability problem if
> multiple mutexes occupy one cache line. It becomes WORSE as more
> mutexes fit into a single cache line and even more worse with the
> number of CPUS accessing such contested lines.
> 

That is a *potential* performance concern although I agree with you in that
mutex's false sharing a cache line would be a problem. However, it is a
performance concern that potentially is alleviated by alternative hashing
where as AFAIK the issues being faced currently are data corruption and
functional issues. I'd take a performance issue over a data corruption
issue any day of the week.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-10  8:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-09 17:24 Another proposal for DAX fault locking Jan Kara
2016-02-09 17:24 ` Jan Kara
2016-02-09 18:18 ` Dan Williams
2016-02-09 18:18   ` Dan Williams
2016-02-10 10:32   ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 10:32     ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 20:08     ` Dan Williams
2016-02-10 20:08       ` Dan Williams
2016-02-11 10:43       ` Jan Kara
2016-02-11 10:43         ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 22:09     ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 22:09       ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 22:39       ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-10 22:39         ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-10 23:34         ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-10 23:34           ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-11 10:55         ` Jan Kara
2016-02-11 10:55           ` Jan Kara
2016-02-11 21:05           ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-11 21:05             ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-10 23:32       ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-10 23:32         ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-11 11:15         ` Jan Kara
2016-02-11 11:15           ` Jan Kara
2016-02-09 18:46 ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-09 18:46   ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-10  8:19   ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2016-02-10  8:19     ` Mel Gorman
2016-02-10 10:18     ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 10:18       ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 12:29 ` Dmitry Monakhov
2016-02-10 12:29   ` Dmitry Monakhov
2016-02-10 12:35   ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 12:35     ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 17:38 ` Boaz Harrosh
2016-02-10 17:38   ` Boaz Harrosh
2016-02-11 10:38   ` Jan Kara
2016-02-11 10:38     ` Jan Kara
2016-02-14  8:51     ` Boaz Harrosh
2016-02-14  8:51       ` Boaz Harrosh
2016-02-10 23:44 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-10 23:44   ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-10 23:51   ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-10 23:51     ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-11  0:13     ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-11  0:13       ` Ross Zwisler

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=20160210081922.GC4763@suse.de \
    --to=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=cedric.blancher@gmail.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
    --cc=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=willy@linux.intel.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.