From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8969DC433E0 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 17:15:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A2D2073B for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 17:15:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="UgTmTyPN" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 44A2D2073B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.dk Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D910080007; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 13:15:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id D1A978E0006; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 13:15:26 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id BBC5580007; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 13:15:26 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0057.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.57]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F0F68E0006 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 13:15:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin06.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5703A180AD82F for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 17:15:26 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76881294252.06.snow96_699d17a331419 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2557B1027AF69 for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 17:15:26 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: snow96_699d17a331419 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4370 Received: from mail-pj1-f66.google.com (mail-pj1-f66.google.com [209.85.216.66]) by imf44.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 17:15:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pj1-f66.google.com with SMTP id 5so119468pjd.0 for ; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 10:15:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WsYNSM2tJ88YCalPymb6HrMzWTrL06Vmn6FYR6YE7/Y=; b=UgTmTyPNErDWoyfDpvqEdQs/U0cshfD8CeAre29uvZ/dsDLiaKCLIx+B0hmevfnub2 0tDRZhun5AbIaUe8SBeRwV24cBYLkx5zGsLhc5btRwWKuuENnv81W1XD4EzHeU2TFL+Y YPXWGNMQB3ZfSNqm0aK6qvPU8H0P/AAcN3ohrkN+vUQc1U37ZPjHjGoxZ9FQoEXx9fFM 1wtG0Pg1H2Xqifo4XuQFBFtIU8HsukcHZMHwyTUDR+6WV7LFfjpVnCxNeUYBZQCA+ERb +nkfqnqnfPlKH2LndTUNPgXx9+YkQF0yCX5ZGsn9nw2tkdHaJ11TlFd+n8Tq7PTfxJdJ qQXw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=WsYNSM2tJ88YCalPymb6HrMzWTrL06Vmn6FYR6YE7/Y=; b=Dpmp+Ckmj3DV91jB0MhLBKENxnFx8JI6YysIusb4cwJ3hHG3HKFpQnMQl7yjaMEIMm xjhS7PH6MdFTtcXPnkHfnb+VoknCAU6pdmoKYCIFq7QxI3xttxuEMXTN5eIne6m+/z8b RVOlmz9JbSYc0cVG5Twc7znadYtP7+EQ+t/iNqxU3wjx/bcHrzVrzZJ6XRieXMt2IlLN BLCdpUwhwdR3fSxToqISjr3AS8xC6VtMGvenI4q1R4ADLBcuoL1ioCAJefgRkLXWCa1P FE4YXfqnrmBhjqQB4RsdSV7slYrS7bQFyzsgORI9xQH+IuS3kFt+vJJsNOsVTt7FRV6R khfg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532q6GSsIJAjVaQqV//Lk6aCfPpob20vPbjV2ZbpiwNwaeR2c7UU CtFzQ9mV6hqBCnJNcHI7uFss2A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwfvpv+bJ+nV4YfmPVaXfQZIyLbxNwCqF8WqLkarYS7Wisy1DDnTyqP7EEmu/OsOjnF86QdFA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:4d4e:: with SMTP id l14mr470026pjh.10.1591031724348; Mon, 01 Jun 2020 10:15:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.188] ([66.219.217.173]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id mg14sm33297pjb.48.2020.06.01.10.15.22 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 01 Jun 2020 10:15:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] mm: add support for async page locking To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org References: <20200526195123.29053-1-axboe@kernel.dk> <20200526195123.29053-5-axboe@kernel.dk> <20200601142649.GJ19604@bombadil.infradead.org> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <2f4dbb05-4874-6386-f9ee-06fdbaf482bf@kernel.dk> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 11:15:22 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200601142649.GJ19604@bombadil.infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 2557B1027AF69 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.00 / 100.00] X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000001, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 6/1/20 8:26 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 01:51:15PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> +static int __wait_on_page_locked_async(struct page *page, >> + struct wait_page_queue *wait, bool set) >> +{ >> + struct wait_queue_head *q = page_waitqueue(page); >> + int ret = 0; >> + >> + wait->page = page; >> + wait->bit_nr = PG_locked; >> + >> + spin_lock_irq(&q->lock); >> + if (set) >> + ret = !trylock_page(page); >> + else >> + ret = PageLocked(page); >> + if (ret) { >> + __add_wait_queue_entry_tail(q, &wait->wait); >> + SetPageWaiters(page); >> + if (set) >> + ret = !trylock_page(page); >> + else >> + ret = PageLocked(page); > > Between the callers and this function, we actually look at PG_lock three > times; once in the caller, then after taking the spinlock, then after > adding ourselves to the waitqueue. I understand the first and third, but > is it really worth doing the second test? It feels unlikely to succeed > and only saves us setting PageWaiters. That's probably true, and we can skip the 2nd one. I'll make the change. -- Jens Axboe