linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7][memcg] use spin lock instead of bit_spin_lock in page

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 3 Aug 2010 08:46:38 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp" <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	m-ikeda@...jp.nec.com,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7][memcg] use spin lock instead of bit_spin_lock
 in page_cgroup

On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 23:39:11 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> * Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com> [2010-07-27 23:16:54]:
> 
> > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> writes:
> > 
> > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> > >
> > > This patch replaces page_cgroup's bit_spinlock with spinlock. In general,
> > > spinlock has good implementation than bit_spin_lock and we should use
> > > it if we have a room for it. In 64bit arch, we have extra 4bytes.
> > > Let's use it.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> > > --
> > > Index: mmotm-0719/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- mmotm-0719.orig/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
> > > +++ mmotm-0719/include/linux/page_cgroup.h
> > > @@ -10,8 +10,14 @@
> > >   * All page cgroups are allocated at boot or memory hotplug event,
> > >   * then the page cgroup for pfn always exists.
> > >   */
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
> > > +#define PCG_HAS_SPINLOCK
> > > +#endif
> > >  struct page_cgroup {
> > >  	unsigned long flags;
> > > +#ifdef PCG_HAS_SPINLOCK
> > > +	spinlock_t	lock;
> > > +#endif
> > >  	unsigned short mem_cgroup;	/* ID of assigned memory cgroup */
> > >  	unsigned short blk_cgroup;	/* Not Used..but will be. */
> > >  	struct page *page;
> > > @@ -90,6 +96,16 @@ static inline enum zone_type page_cgroup
> > >  	return page_zonenum(pc->page);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +#ifdef PCG_HAS_SPINLOCK
> > > +static inline void lock_page_cgroup(struct page_cgroup *pc)
> > > +{
> > > +	spin_lock(&pc->lock);
> > > +}
> > 
> > This is minor issue, but this patch breaks usage of PageCgroupLocked().
> > Example from __mem_cgroup_move_account() cases panic:
> > 	VM_BUG_ON(!PageCgroupLocked(pc));
> > 
> > I assume that this patch should also delete the following:
> > - PCG_LOCK definition from page_cgroup.h
> > - TESTPCGFLAG(Locked, LOCK) from page_cgroup.h
> > - PCGF_LOCK from memcontrol.c
> >
> 
> 
> Good catch! But from my understanding of the code we use spinlock_t
> only for 64 bit systems, so we still need the PCG* and TESTPGFLAGS.
>  
The latest sets have proper calls.

-Kame

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/