From: Yosry Ahmed <yosry@kernel.org>
To: Jianyue Wu <wujianyue000@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>,
Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] mm/zswap: replace the zswap_pools list with a fixed pools array
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 00:12:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <anpnowepnexrNea_@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260731-shrink_zswap_entry_v2-0-0-v2-1-e72083aa8734@gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 08:32:47AM +0800, Jianyue Wu wrote:
> Originally zswap holds its pools on an RCU list whose head also serves as
> the "current pool". Only a handful of pools are ever live at once, since
> a new pool is only created when the compressor is (re)set and pools are
> reused across compressor switches.
>
> A later change wants to store a reference to each entry's pool in every
> zswap_entry, where a pointer would cost 8 bytes but a small pool index
> only one. To make that index possible, the current change holds the
> pools in a fixed ZSWAP_MAX_POOLS-element array so each pool has a stable
> slot number, and tracks the current pool with a separate rcu-protected
> pointer.
>
> The array keeps the same RCU publish/retire discipline the list had, so
> lookup and teardown stay equivalent. Newly created pools are published
> into the array before they become current, so zswap_total_pages() can
> observe an empty pool briefly; that is harmless.
I don't follow. A newly created pool is empty anyway, so not being
iterated in zswap_total_pages() should be normal. Why do we need to call
this out?
> This also caps the
> number of live pools at ZSWAP_MAX_POOLS (16), which is plenty in
> practice; pool creation warns and fails if the array ever fills, and the
> limit can be raised.
>
> Suggested-by: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>
> Suggested-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosry@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jianyue Wu <wujianyue000@gmail.com>
> ---
> mm/zswap.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/zswap.c b/mm/zswap.c
> index 4e76a4a87cdc..b203934d3be8 100644
> --- a/mm/zswap.c
> +++ b/mm/zswap.c
> @@ -154,12 +154,20 @@ struct zswap_pool {
> struct zs_pool *zs_pool;
> struct crypto_acomp_ctx __percpu *acomp_ctx;
> struct percpu_ref ref;
> - struct list_head list;
> struct work_struct release_work;
> struct hlist_node node;
> + u8 idx;
> char tfm_name[CRYPTO_MAX_ALG_NAME];
> };
>
> +#define ZSWAP_MAX_POOLS 16
> +static struct zswap_pool __rcu *zswap_pools[ZSWAP_MAX_POOLS];
> +/*
> + * The current pool (NULL if none): an alias of one zswap_pools[] slot. It
> + * always holds a ref, so it is never retired from under us.
> + */
> +static struct zswap_pool __rcu *zswap_current_pool;
> +
> /* Global LRU lists shared by all zswap pools. */
> static struct list_lru zswap_list_lru;
>
> @@ -200,9 +208,7 @@ struct zswap_entry {
> static struct xarray *zswap_trees[MAX_SWAPFILES];
> static unsigned int nr_zswap_trees[MAX_SWAPFILES];
>
> -/* RCU-protected iteration */
> -static LIST_HEAD(zswap_pools);
> -/* protects zswap_pools list modification */
> +/* protects the zswap_pools array and zswap_current_pool */
> static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(zswap_pools_lock);
> /* pool counter to provide unique names to zsmalloc */
> static atomic_t zswap_pools_count = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
> @@ -270,6 +276,25 @@ static void acomp_ctx_free(struct crypto_acomp_ctx *acomp_ctx)
> acomp_ctx->buffer = NULL;
> }
>
> +static int zswap_pool_reserve_slot(struct zswap_pool *pool)
> +{
> + int i, ret = -ENOSPC;
> +
> + spin_lock_bh(&zswap_pools_lock);
> + for (i = 0; i < ZSWAP_MAX_POOLS; i++) {
> + if (!rcu_access_pointer(zswap_pools[i])) {
> + /* Set idx before publishing so readers never see it stale. */
> + pool->idx = i;
> + rcu_assign_pointer(zswap_pools[i], pool);
Sashiko points out a seemingly real problem here because we add the pool
to the array before actually making it the current pool.
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260731-shrink_zswap_entry_v2-0-0-v2-0-e72083aa8734%40gmail.com
What if we just reserve an index here but not actually assign the pool?
We can add a marker to the array or sth (e.g. (void *)-1UL)).
> + ret = i;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> + spin_unlock_bh(&zswap_pools_lock);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> static struct zswap_pool *zswap_pool_create(char *compressor)
> {
> struct zswap_pool *pool;
> @@ -313,19 +338,27 @@ static struct zswap_pool *zswap_pool_create(char *compressor)
> if (ret)
> goto cpuhp_add_fail;
>
> - /* being the current pool takes 1 ref; this func expects the
> - * caller to always add the new pool as the current pool
> + /*
> + * After a successful create, the caller makes this the current pool.
> + * If the caller fails, it kills the ref to free the reserved slot.
> */
> ret = percpu_ref_init(&pool->ref, __zswap_pool_empty,
> PERCPU_REF_ALLOW_REINIT, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (ret)
> goto ref_fail;
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pool->list);
> +
> + ret = zswap_pool_reserve_slot(pool);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + pr_err("cannot create more than %d pools\n", ZSWAP_MAX_POOLS);
> + goto slot_fail;
> + }
>
> zswap_pool_debug("created", pool);
>
> return pool;
>
> +slot_fail:
> + percpu_ref_exit(&pool->ref);
> ref_fail:
> cpuhp_state_remove_instance(CPUHP_MM_ZSWP_POOL_PREPARE, &pool->node);
>
> @@ -388,7 +421,7 @@ static void __zswap_pool_release(struct work_struct *work)
> WARN_ON(!percpu_ref_is_zero(&pool->ref));
> percpu_ref_exit(&pool->ref);
>
> - /* pool is now off zswap_pools list and has no references. */
> + /* Slot cleared in __zswap_pool_empty(); synchronize_rcu() drained readers. */
> zswap_pool_destroy(pool);
> }
>
> @@ -404,7 +437,11 @@ static void __zswap_pool_empty(struct percpu_ref *ref)
>
> WARN_ON(pool == zswap_pool_current());
>
> - list_del_rcu(&pool->list);
> + /*
> + * Clear the slot before scheduling the release so new readers cannot
> + * see it; __zswap_pool_release()'s synchronize_rcu() drains the rest.
> + */
> + rcu_assign_pointer(zswap_pools[pool->idx], NULL);
>
> INIT_WORK(&pool->release_work, __zswap_pool_release);
> schedule_work(&pool->release_work);
Not related to this change, but I wonder if we can use call_rcu() or
similar here instead of the manual synchronize_rcu().
> @@ -435,7 +472,8 @@ static struct zswap_pool *__zswap_pool_current(void)
> {
> struct zswap_pool *pool;
>
> - pool = list_first_or_null_rcu(&zswap_pools, typeof(*pool), list);
> + pool = rcu_dereference_check(zswap_current_pool,
> + lockdep_is_held(&zswap_pools_lock));
> WARN_ONCE(!pool && zswap_has_pool,
> "%s: no page storage pool!\n", __func__);
>
> @@ -468,11 +506,14 @@ static struct zswap_pool *zswap_pool_current_get(void)
> static struct zswap_pool *zswap_pool_find_get(char *compressor)
> {
> struct zswap_pool *pool;
> + int i;
>
> assert_spin_locked(&zswap_pools_lock);
>
> - list_for_each_entry_rcu(pool, &zswap_pools, list) {
> - if (strcmp(pool->tfm_name, compressor))
> + for (i = 0; i < ZSWAP_MAX_POOLS; i++) {
> + pool = rcu_dereference_protected(zswap_pools[i],
> + lockdep_is_held(&zswap_pools_lock));
We already have an assertion that we are holding the lock above.
> + if (!pool || strcmp(pool->tfm_name, compressor))
> continue;
> /* if we can't get it, it's about to be destroyed */
> if (!zswap_pool_tryget(pool))
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-11 0:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-31 0:32 [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] mm/zswap: shrink zswap_entry via a fixed pool index Jianyue Wu
2026-07-31 0:32 ` [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] mm/zswap: replace the zswap_pools list with a fixed pools array Jianyue Wu
2026-08-11 0:12 ` Yosry Ahmed [this message]
2026-07-31 0:32 ` [PATCH RFC v2 2/2] mm/zswap: reference the pool by index to shrink struct zswap_entry Jianyue Wu
2026-08-11 0:20 ` Yosry Ahmed
2026-08-11 1:11 ` Jianyue Wu
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=anpnowepnexrNea_@google.com \
--to=yosry@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
--cc=chrisl@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nphamcs@gmail.com \
--cc=wujianyue000@gmail.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).