linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Cedric Blancher <cedric.blancher@gmail.com>,
	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 11:18:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160210101857.GC12245@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160210081922.GC4763@suse.de>

On Wed 10-02-16 08:19:22, Mel Gorman wrote:
> 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.

Exactly. We have to add *some* locking to fix the data corruption. Cache
aliasing of hashed mutexes may be an issue but I believe the result will be
still better than a single mutex.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-10 10:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ 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 18:18 ` Dan Williams
2016-02-10 10:32   ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 20:08     ` Dan Williams
2016-02-11 10:43       ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 22:09     ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 22:39       ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-10 23:34         ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-11 10:55         ` Jan Kara
2016-02-11 21:05           ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-10 23:32       ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-11 11:15         ` Jan Kara
2016-02-09 18:46 ` Cedric Blancher
2016-02-10  8:19   ` Mel Gorman
2016-02-10 10:18     ` Jan Kara [this message]
2016-02-10 12:29 ` Dmitry Monakhov
2016-02-10 12:35   ` Jan Kara
2016-02-10 17:38 ` Boaz Harrosh
2016-02-11 10:38   ` Jan Kara
2016-02-14  8:51     ` Boaz Harrosh
2016-02-10 23:44 ` Ross Zwisler
2016-02-10 23:51   ` Cedric Blancher
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=20160210101857.GC12245@quack.suse.cz \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=cedric.blancher@gmail.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --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 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).