linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Guixin Liu <kanie@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/filemap.c: fix the timing of asignment of prev_pos
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 16:25:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yv0IccKJ6Spk/zH4@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1660744317-8183-1-git-send-email-kanie@linux.alibaba.com>

On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 09:51:57PM +0800, Guixin Liu wrote:
> The prev_pos should be assigned before the iocb->ki_pos is incremented,
> so that the prev_pos is the exact location of the last visit.
> 
> Fixes: 06c0444290cec ("mm/filemap.c: generic_file_buffered_read() now
> uses find_get_pages_contig")
> Signed-off-by: Guixin Liu <kanie@linux.alibaba.com>
> 
> ---
> Hi guys,
>     When I`m running repetitive 4k read io which has same offset,
> I find that access to folio_mark_accessed is inevitable in the
> read process, the reason is that the prev_pos is assigned after the
> iocb->ki_pos is incremented, so that the prev_pos is always not equal
> to the position currently visited.
>     Is this a bug that needs fixing?

I think you've misunderstood the purpose of 'prev_pos'.  But this has
been the source of bugs, so let's go through it in detail.

In general, we want to mark a folio as accessed each time we read from
it.  So if we do this:

	read(fd, buf, 1024 * 1024);

we want to mark each folio as having been accessed.

But if we're doing lots of short reads, we don't want to mark a folio as
being accessed multiple times (if you dive into the implementation,
you'll see the first time, the 'referenced' flag is set and the second
time, the folio is moved to the active list, so it matters how often
we call mark_accessed).  IOW:

	for (i = 0; i < 1024 * 1024; i++)
		read(fd, buf, 1);

should do the same amount of accessed/referenced/activation as the single
read above.

So when we store ki_pos in prev_pos, we don't want to know "Where did
the previous read start?"  We want to know "Where did the previous read
end".  That's why when we test it, we check whether prev_pos - 1 is in
the same folio as the offset we're looking at:

                if (!pos_same_folio(iocb->ki_pos, ra->prev_pos - 1,
                                                        fbatch.folios[0]))
                        folio_mark_accessed(fbatch.folios[0]);

I'm not super-proud of this code, and accept that it's confusing.
But I don't think the patch below is right.  If you could share
your actual test and show what's going wrong, I'm interested.

I think what you're saying is that this loop:

	for (i = 0; i < 1000; i++)
		pread(fd, buf, 4096, 1024 * 1024);

results in the folio at offset 1MB being marked as accessed more than
once.  If so, then I think that's the algorithm behaving as designed.
Whether that's desirable is a different question; when I touched this
code last, I was trying to restore the previous behaviour which was
inadvertently broken.  I'm not taking a position on what the right
behaviour is for such code.

>  mm/filemap.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index 660490c..68fd987 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -2703,8 +2703,8 @@ ssize_t filemap_read(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter,
>  			copied = copy_folio_to_iter(folio, offset, bytes, iter);
>  
>  			already_read += copied;
> -			iocb->ki_pos += copied;
>  			ra->prev_pos = iocb->ki_pos;
> +			iocb->ki_pos += copied;
>  
>  			if (copied < bytes) {
>  				error = -EFAULT;
> -- 
> 1.8.3.1
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-08-17 15:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-17 13:51 [RFC PATCH] mm/filemap.c: fix the timing of asignment of prev_pos Guixin Liu
2022-08-17 15:16 ` Andrew Morton
2022-08-17 15:30   ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-08-17 15:25 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2022-08-18  3:13   ` Guixin Liu

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=Yv0IccKJ6Spk/zH4@casper.infradead.org \
    --to=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kanie@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).