linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 17/19] fs: buffer: Do not use unnecessary atomic operations when discarding buffers

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: <20140513134943.GD22070@quack.suse.cz>
Date:	Tue, 13 May 2014 15:49:43 +0200
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux-FSDevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/19] fs: buffer: Do not use unnecessary atomic
 operations when discarding buffers

On Tue 13-05-14 13:50:07, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 01:09:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:45:48AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > Discarding buffers uses a bunch of atomic operations when discarding buffers
> > > because ...... I can't think of a reason. Use a cmpxchg loop to clear all the
> > > necessary flags. In most (all?) cases this will be a single atomic operations.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
> > > ---
> > >  fs/buffer.c                 | 14 +++++++++-----
> > >  include/linux/buffer_head.h |  5 +++++
> > >  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/fs/buffer.c b/fs/buffer.c
> > > index 9ddb9fc..e80012d 100644
> > > --- a/fs/buffer.c
> > > +++ b/fs/buffer.c
> > > @@ -1485,14 +1485,18 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(set_bh_page);
> > >   */
> > >  static void discard_buffer(struct buffer_head * bh)
> > >  {
> > > +	unsigned long b_state, b_state_old;
> > > +
> > >  	lock_buffer(bh);
> > >  	clear_buffer_dirty(bh);
> > >  	bh->b_bdev = NULL;
> > > -	clear_buffer_mapped(bh);
> > > -	clear_buffer_req(bh);
> > > -	clear_buffer_new(bh);
> > > -	clear_buffer_delay(bh);
> > > -	clear_buffer_unwritten(bh);
> > > +	b_state = bh->b_state;
> > > +	for (;;) {
> > > +		b_state_old = cmpxchg(&bh->b_state, b_state, (b_state & ~BUFFER_FLAGS_DISCARD));
> > > +		if (b_state_old == b_state)
> > > +			break;
> > > +		b_state = b_state_old;
> > > +	}
> > >  	unlock_buffer(bh);
> > >  }
> > 
> > So.. I'm soon going to introduce atomic_{or,and}() and
> > atomic64_{or,and}() across the board, but of course this isn't an
> > atomic_long_t but a regular unsigned long.
> > 
> > Its a bit unfortunate we have this discrepancy with types vs atomic ops,
> > there's:
> > 
> >   cmpxchg, xchg -- mostly available for all 1,2,3,4 (and 8 where
> >   appropriate) byte values.
> > 
> >   bitops -- operate on unsigned long *
> > 
> >   atomic* -- operate on atomic_*t
> 
> I hit the same problem when dealing with pageblock bitmap. I would have
> preferred it to do an atomic_read() but the actual conversion to use
> atomic_t for the map became a mess with little or no upside.
> 
> > 
> > operation which is available on a lot of architectures, we'll be stuck
> > with a cmpxchg loop instead :/
> > 
> > *sigh*
> > 
> > Anyway, nothing wrong with this patch, however, you could, if you really
> > wanted to push things, also include BH_Lock in that clear :-)
> 
> That's a bold strategy Cotton.
> 
> Untested patch on top
  Although this looks correct, I have to say I prefer the explicit
unlock_buffer() unless this has a measurable benefit.

								Honza
 
> ---8<---
> diff --git a/fs/buffer.c b/fs/buffer.c
> index e80012d..42fcb6d 100644
> --- a/fs/buffer.c
> +++ b/fs/buffer.c
> @@ -1490,6 +1490,8 @@ static void discard_buffer(struct buffer_head * bh)
>  	lock_buffer(bh);
>  	clear_buffer_dirty(bh);
>  	bh->b_bdev = NULL;
> +
> +	smp_mb__before_clear_bit();
>  	b_state = bh->b_state;
>  	for (;;) {
>  		b_state_old = cmpxchg(&bh->b_state, b_state, (b_state & ~BUFFER_FLAGS_DISCARD));
> @@ -1497,7 +1499,13 @@ static void discard_buffer(struct buffer_head * bh)
>  			break;
>  		b_state = b_state_old;
>  	}
> -	unlock_buffer(bh);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * BUFFER_FLAGS_DISCARD include BH_lock so it has been cleared so the
> +	 * wake_up_bit is the last part of a unlock_buffer
> +	 */
> +	smp_mb__after_clear_bit();
> +	wake_up_bit(&bh->b_state, BH_Lock);
>  }
>  
>  /**
> diff --git a/include/linux/buffer_head.h b/include/linux/buffer_head.h
> index 95f565a..523db58 100644
> --- a/include/linux/buffer_head.h
> +++ b/include/linux/buffer_head.h
> @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ struct buffer_head {
>  /* Bits that are cleared during an invalidate */
>  #define BUFFER_FLAGS_DISCARD \
>  	(1 << BH_Mapped | 1 << BH_New | 1 << BH_Req | \
> -	 1 << BH_Delay | 1 << BH_Unwritten)
> +	 1 << BH_Delay | 1 << BH_Unwritten | 1 << BH_Lock)
>  
>  /*
>   * macro tricks to expand the set_buffer_foo(), clear_buffer_foo()
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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/