From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kernel.2@gmail.com>
To: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@darnok.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] zram: Fix deadlock bug in partial write
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:20:20 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130122151808.GA3757@blaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50FE6025.2080609@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:47:17AM +0100, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> On 01/22/2013 01:07 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Now zram allocates new page with GFP_KERNEL in zram I/O path
> > if IO is partial. Unfortunately, It may cuase deadlock with
> > reclaim path so this patch solves the problem.
> >
> > Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
> > Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >
> > We could use GFP_IO instead of GFP_ATOMIC in zram_bvec_read with
> > some modification related to buffer allocation in case of partial IO.
> > But it needs more churn and prevent merge this patch into stable
> > if we should send this to stable so I'd like to keep it as simple
> > as possbile. GFP_IO usage could be separate patch after we merge it.
> > Thanks.
>
> I'd rather have a preallocated buffer for that. It would make
> zram_bvec_read/write() simpler (no need to deal with an allocation
> failure or to free the buffer) and it would be consistent with the way
> other similar buffer works (compress_workmem/buffer).
Consistent? Other buffers are MUST for zram working while the buffer
for partial I/O is supplement. Although partial I/O might be common in your config,
it doesn't match with my usecase. I didn't see any partial IO in my usecase.
Nontheless, why should I pay free 4K? Because of just making code SIMPLE?
I don't think current alloc/free handling about partial I/O is mess at the cost
of 4K. And we could use a few zram(a swap and a 2-compressed tmpfs) in system
so the cost is n*4K. Please keep in mind that ZRAM's goal is memory efficiency
and have used in many embedded system which they are always trying to save
just hundred byte.
>
> Jerome
>
> >
> > drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
> > index 61fb8f1..b285b3a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c
> > @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ static int zram_bvec_read(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec,
> > user_mem = kmap_atomic(page);
> > if (is_partial_io(bvec))
> > /* Use a temporary buffer to decompress the page */
> > - uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > else
> > uncmem = user_mem;
> >
> > @@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static int zram_bvec_write(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec, u32 index,
> > * This is a partial IO. We need to read the full page
> > * before to write the changes.
> > */
> > - uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + uncmem = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_NOIO);
> > if (!uncmem) {
> > pr_info("Error allocating temp memory!\n");
> > ret = -ENOMEM;
> >
>
> --
> 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>
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-22 15:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-22 0:07 [PATCH v4 1/4] zram: Fix deadlock bug in partial write Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] zram: force disksize setting before using zram Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] zram: give up lazy initialization of zram metadata Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 0:07 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] zram: get rid of lockdep warning Minchan Kim
2013-01-22 9:47 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] zram: Fix deadlock bug in partial write Jerome Marchand
2013-01-22 15:20 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2013-01-22 18:02 ` Nitin Gupta
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=20130122151808.GA3757@blaptop \
--to=minchan.kernel.2@gmail.com \
--cc=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jmarchan@redhat.com \
--cc=konrad@darnok.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ngupta@vflare.org \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.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).