linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mm, compaction: properly signal and act upon lock and need

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: <20140519163741.55998ce65534ed73d913ee2c@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 19 May 2014 16:37:41 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc:	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm, compaction: properly signal and act upon lock
 and need_sched() contention

On Fri, 16 May 2014 11:47:53 +0200 Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> wrote:

> Compaction uses compact_checklock_irqsave() function to periodically check for
> lock contention and need_resched() to either abort async compaction, or to
> free the lock, schedule and retake the lock. When aborting, cc->contended is
> set to signal the contended state to the caller. Two problems have been
> identified in this mechanism.
> 
> First, compaction also calls directly cond_resched() in both scanners when no
> lock is yet taken. This call either does not abort async compaction, or set
> cc->contended appropriately. This patch introduces a new compact_should_abort()
> function to achieve both. In isolate_freepages(), the check frequency is
> reduced to once by SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pageblocks to match what the migration
> scanner does in the preliminary page checks. In case a pageblock is found
> suitable for calling isolate_freepages_block(), the checks within there are
> done on higher frequency.
> 
> Second, isolate_freepages() does not check if isolate_freepages_block()
> aborted due to contention, and advances to the next pageblock. This violates
> the principle of aborting on contention, and might result in pageblocks not
> being scanned completely, since the scanning cursor is advanced. This patch
> makes isolate_freepages_block() check the cc->contended flag and abort.
> 
> In case isolate_freepages() has already isolated some pages before aborting
> due to contention, page migration will proceed, which is OK since we do not
> want to waste the work that has been done, and page migration has own checks
> for contention. However, we do not want another isolation attempt by either
> of the scanners, so cc->contended flag check is added also to
> compaction_alloc() and compact_finished() to make sure compaction is aborted
> right after the migration.

What are the runtime effect of this change?

> Reported-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>

What did Joonsoo report?  Perhaps this is the same thing..

>
> ...
>
> @@ -718,9 +739,11 @@ static void isolate_freepages(struct zone *zone,
>  		/*
>  		 * This can iterate a massively long zone without finding any
>  		 * suitable migration targets, so periodically check if we need
> -		 * to schedule.
> +		 * to schedule, or even abort async compaction.
>  		 */
> -		cond_resched();
> +		if (!(block_start_pfn % (SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX * pageblock_nr_pages))
> +						&& compact_should_abort(cc))

This seems rather gratuitously inefficient and isn't terribly clear. 
What's wrong with

	if ((++foo % SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX) == 0 && compact_should_abort(cc))

?

(Assumes that SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX is power-of-2 and that the compiler will
use &)

--
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/