| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 21:07:35 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jack@...e.cz,
hch@...radead.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, vgoyal@...hat.com,
lizefan@...wei.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
mhocko@...e.cz, clm@...com, fengguang.wu@...el.com,
david@...morbit.com, gthelen@...gle.com, khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH 45/51] writeback: implement wb_wait_for_single_work()
On Fri 22-05-15 17:13:59, Tejun Heo wrote:
> For cgroup writeback, multiple wb_writeback_work items may need to be
> issuedto accomplish a single task. The previous patch updated the
> waiting mechanism such that wb_wait_for_completion() can wait for
> multiple work items.
>
> Issuing mulitple work items involves memory allocation which may fail.
> As most writeback operations can't fail or blocked on memory
> allocation, in such cases, we'll fall back to sequential issuing of an
> on-stack work item, which would need to be waited upon sequentially.
>
> This patch implements wb_wait_for_single_work() which waits for a
> single work item independently from wb_completion waiting so that such
> fallback mechanism can be used without getting tangled with the usual
> issuing / completion operation.
I don't understand, why is the special handling with single_wait,
single_done necessary. When we fail to allocate work and thus use the
base_work for submission, we can still use the standard completion mechanism
to wait for work to finish, can't we?
BTW: Again it would be easier for me to review this if the implementation
of this function was in one patch with the use of it so that one can see
how it gets used...
Honza
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> ---
> fs/fs-writeback.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> index d7d4a1b..093b959 100644
> --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> @@ -52,6 +52,8 @@ struct wb_writeback_work {
> unsigned int for_background:1;
> unsigned int for_sync:1; /* sync(2) WB_SYNC_ALL writeback */
> unsigned int auto_free:1; /* free on completion */
> + unsigned int single_wait:1;
> + unsigned int single_done:1;
> enum wb_reason reason; /* why was writeback initiated? */
>
> struct list_head list; /* pending work list */
> @@ -178,8 +180,11 @@ static void wb_queue_work(struct bdi_writeback *wb,
> trace_writeback_queue(wb->bdi, work);
>
> spin_lock_bh(&wb->work_lock);
> - if (!test_bit(WB_registered, &wb->state))
> + if (!test_bit(WB_registered, &wb->state)) {
> + if (work->single_wait)
> + work->single_done = 1;
> goto out_unlock;
> + }
> if (work->done)
> atomic_inc(&work->done->cnt);
> list_add_tail(&work->list, &wb->work_list);
> @@ -234,6 +239,32 @@ int inode_congested(struct inode *inode, int cong_bits)
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inode_congested);
>
> /**
> + * wb_wait_for_single_work - wait for completion of a single bdi_writeback_work
> + * @bdi: bdi the work item was issued to
> + * @work: work item to wait for
> + *
> + * Wait for the completion of @work which was issued to one of @bdi's
> + * bdi_writeback's. The caller must have set @work->single_wait before
> + * issuing it. This wait operates independently fo
> + * wb_wait_for_completion() and also disables automatic freeing of @work.
> + */
> +static void wb_wait_for_single_work(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
> + struct wb_writeback_work *work)
> +{
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!work->single_wait))
> + return;
> +
> + wait_event(bdi->wb_waitq, work->single_done);
> +
> + /*
> + * Paired with smp_wmb() in wb_do_writeback() and ensures that all
> + * modifications to @work prior to assertion of ->single_done is
> + * visible to the caller once this function returns.
> + */
> + smp_rmb();
> +}
> +
> +/**
> * wb_split_bdi_pages - split nr_pages to write according to bandwidth
> * @wb: target bdi_writeback to split @nr_pages to
> * @nr_pages: number of pages to write for the whole bdi
> @@ -1178,14 +1209,26 @@ static long wb_do_writeback(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
> set_bit(WB_writeback_running, &wb->state);
> while ((work = get_next_work_item(wb)) != NULL) {
> struct wb_completion *done = work->done;
> + bool need_wake_up = false;
>
> trace_writeback_exec(wb->bdi, work);
>
> wrote += wb_writeback(wb, work);
>
> - if (work->auto_free)
> + if (work->single_wait) {
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(work->auto_free);
> + /* paired w/ rmb in wb_wait_for_single_work() */
> + smp_wmb();
> + work->single_done = 1;
> + need_wake_up = true;
> + } else if (work->auto_free) {
> kfree(work);
> + }
> +
> if (done && atomic_dec_and_test(&done->cnt))
> + need_wake_up = true;
> +
> + if (need_wake_up)
> wake_up_all(&wb->bdi->wb_waitq);
> }
>
> --
> 2.4.0
>
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists