linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org
Cc: rientjes@google.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
	42.hyeyoo@gmail.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 7/7] slub: Optimize deactivate_slab()
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 19:41:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <057353e0-7000-4fe5-a64c-092001ae3883@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9db65a8d-9f0d-e8ab-55e4-4197dfc54032@suse.cz>

On 2023/10/31 19:15, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 10/24/23 11:33, chengming.zhou@linux.dev wrote:
>> From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
>>
>> Since the introduce of unfrozen slabs on cpu partial list, we don't
>> need to synchronize the slab frozen state under the node list_lock.
>>
>> The caller of deactivate_slab() and the caller of __slab_free() won't
>> manipulate the slab list concurrently.
>>
>> So we can get node list_lock in the last stage if we really need to
>> manipulate the slab list in this path.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
> 
> Nice simplification!
> 
>> ---
>>  mm/slub.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------------
>>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
>> index 486d44421432..64d550e415eb 100644
>> --- a/mm/slub.c
>> +++ b/mm/slub.c
>> @@ -2449,10 +2449,8 @@ static void init_kmem_cache_cpus(struct kmem_cache *s)
>>  static void deactivate_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
>>  			    void *freelist)
>>  {
>> -	enum slab_modes { M_NONE, M_PARTIAL, M_FREE, M_FULL_NOLIST };
>>  	struct kmem_cache_node *n = get_node(s, slab_nid(slab));
>>  	int free_delta = 0;
>> -	enum slab_modes mode = M_NONE;
>>  	void *nextfree, *freelist_iter, *freelist_tail;
>>  	int tail = DEACTIVATE_TO_HEAD;
>>  	unsigned long flags = 0;
>> @@ -2499,58 +2497,40 @@ static void deactivate_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
>>  	 * unfrozen and number of objects in the slab may have changed.
>>  	 * Then release lock and retry cmpxchg again.
>>  	 */
> 
> This comment above (including parts not visible here) should be updated as
> there is no more list manipulation during unfreeze.

Right!

> 
>> -redo:
>> -
>> -	old.freelist = READ_ONCE(slab->freelist);
>> -	old.counters = READ_ONCE(slab->counters);
>> -	VM_BUG_ON(!old.frozen);
>> -
>> -	/* Determine target state of the slab */
>> -	new.counters = old.counters;
>> -	if (freelist_tail) {
>> -		new.inuse -= free_delta;
>> -		set_freepointer(s, freelist_tail, old.freelist);
>> -		new.freelist = freelist;
>> -	} else
>> -		new.freelist = old.freelist;
>> +	do {
>> +		old.freelist = READ_ONCE(slab->freelist);
>> +		old.counters = READ_ONCE(slab->counters);
>> +		VM_BUG_ON(!old.frozen);
>> +
>> +		/* Determine target state of the slab */
>> +		new.counters = old.counters;
>> +		new.frozen = 0;
>> +		if (freelist_tail) {
>> +			new.inuse -= free_delta;
>> +			set_freepointer(s, freelist_tail, old.freelist);
>> +			new.freelist = freelist;
>> +		} else
>> +			new.freelist = old.freelist;
> 
> Per coding style we should have the else with { } even if it's one line, to
> match the if branch. Since we touch the code that was previously violating
> the style, we can fix up.

Ok, I will fix all these.

Big thanks for your review!

> 
>>  
>> -	new.frozen = 0;
>> +	} while (!slab_update_freelist(s, slab,
>> +		old.freelist, old.counters,
>> +		new.freelist, new.counters,
>> +		"unfreezing slab"));
>>  
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Stage three: Manipulate the slab list based on the updated state.
>> +	 */
>>  	if (!new.inuse && n->nr_partial >= s->min_partial) {
>> -		mode = M_FREE;
>> +		stat(s, DEACTIVATE_EMPTY);
>> +		discard_slab(s, slab);
>> +		stat(s, FREE_SLAB);
>>  	} else if (new.freelist) {
>> -		mode = M_PARTIAL;
>> -		/*
>> -		 * Taking the spinlock removes the possibility that
>> -		 * acquire_slab() will see a slab that is frozen
>> -		 */
>>  		spin_lock_irqsave(&n->list_lock, flags);
>> -	} else {
>> -		mode = M_FULL_NOLIST;
>> -	}
>> -
>> -
>> -	if (!slab_update_freelist(s, slab,
>> -				old.freelist, old.counters,
>> -				new.freelist, new.counters,
>> -				"unfreezing slab")) {
>> -		if (mode == M_PARTIAL)
>> -			spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
>> -		goto redo;
>> -	}
>> -
>> -
>> -	if (mode == M_PARTIAL) {
>>  		add_partial(n, slab, tail);
>>  		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
>>  		stat(s, tail);
>> -	} else if (mode == M_FREE) {
>> -		stat(s, DEACTIVATE_EMPTY);
>> -		discard_slab(s, slab);
>> -		stat(s, FREE_SLAB);
>> -	} else if (mode == M_FULL_NOLIST) {
>> +	} else
>>  		stat(s, DEACTIVATE_FULL);
>> -	}
> 
> Same here.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
>>  }
>>  
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_CPU_PARTIAL
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2023-10-31 11:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-24  9:33 [RFC PATCH v3 0/7] slub: Delay freezing of CPU partial slabs chengming.zhou
2023-10-24  9:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/7] slub: Keep track of whether slub is on the per-node partial list chengming.zhou
     [not found]   ` <6d054dbe-c90d-591d-11ca-b9ad3787683d@suse.cz>
2023-10-28  1:30     ` Chengming Zhou
2023-10-24  9:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/7] slub: Prepare __slab_free() for unfrozen partial slab out of node " chengming.zhou
     [not found]   ` <43da5c9a-aeff-1bff-81a8-4611470c2514@suse.cz>
2023-10-28  1:35     ` Chengming Zhou
2023-10-24  9:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/7] slub: Reflow ___slab_alloc() chengming.zhou
2023-10-24  9:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 4/7] slub: Change get_partial() interfaces to return slab chengming.zhou
2023-10-30 16:55   ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-31  2:22     ` Chengming Zhou
2023-10-24  9:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 5/7] slub: Introduce freeze_slab() chengming.zhou
2023-10-30 18:11   ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-24  9:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 6/7] slub: Delay freezing of partial slabs chengming.zhou
2023-10-25  2:18   ` Chengming Zhou
2023-10-26  5:49   ` kernel test robot
2023-10-26  7:41     ` Chengming Zhou
2023-10-31  9:50   ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-24  9:33 ` [RFC PATCH v3 7/7] slub: Optimize deactivate_slab() chengming.zhou
2023-10-31 11:15   ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-31 11:41     ` Chengming Zhou [this message]
2023-10-27 17:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 0/7] slub: Delay freezing of CPU partial slabs Christoph Lameter
2023-10-28  2:36   ` Chengming Zhou
2023-10-30 16:19     ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-10-31  2:29       ` Chengming Zhou
2023-10-30 19:25     ` Christoph Lameter
2023-10-31  2:50       ` Chengming Zhou
2023-10-31  3:47         ` Christoph Lameter
2023-10-31  4:57           ` Chengming Zhou

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=057353e0-7000-4fe5-a64c-092001ae3883@linux.dev \
    --to=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
    --cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=zhouchengming@bytedance.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 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).