linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm: zpool: implement zsmalloc shrinking

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

Message-ID: <CALZtONB4j=yd=cGBnkHy0+H0nyUCwG3PGb4K6XYCyRHA=mqt-g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 27 Apr 2014 00:13:30 -0400
From:	Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>
To:	Weijie Yang <weijie.yang.kh@...il.com>
Cc:	Seth Jennings <sjennings@...iantweb.net>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Weijie Yang <weijie.yang@...sung.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm: zpool: implement zsmalloc shrinking

On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 4:37 AM, Weijie Yang <weijie.yang.kh@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org> wrote:
>> Add zs_shrink() and helper functions to zsmalloc.  Update zsmalloc
>> zs_create_pool() creation function to include ops param that provides
>> an evict() function for use during shrinking.  Update helper function
>> fix_fullness_group() to always reinsert changed zspages even if the
>> fullness group did not change, so they are updated in the fullness
>> group lru.  Also update zram to use the new zsmalloc pool creation
>> function but pass NULL as the ops param, since zram does not use
>> pool shrinking.
>>
>
> I only review the code without test, however, I think this patch is
> not acceptable.
>
> The biggest problem is it will call zswap_writeback_entry() under lock,
> zswap_writeback_entry() may sleep, so it is a bug. see below

thanks for catching that!

>
> The 3/4 patch has a lot of #ifdef, I don't think it's a good kind of
> abstract way.

it has the #ifdef's because there's no point in compiling in code to
use zbud/zsmalloc if zbud/zsmalloc isn't compiled...what alternative
to #ifdef's would you suggest?  Or are there just specific #ifdefs you
suggest to remove?

>
> What about just disable zswap reclaim when using zsmalloc?
> There is a long way to optimize writeback reclaim(both zswap and zram) ,
> Maybe a small and simple step forward is better.

I think it's possible to just remove the zspage from the class while
under lock, then unlock and reclaim it.  As long as there's a
guarantee that zswap (or any zpool/zsmalloc reclaim user) doesn't
map/access the handle after evict() completes successfully, that
should work.  There does need to be some synchronization between
zs_free() and each handle's eviction though, similar to zbud's
under_reclaim flag.  I'll work on a v2 patch.
--
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/