| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20170622083805.GB31693@quack2.suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:38:05 +0200
From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>, Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>,
jbacik@...com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] writeback: Rework wb_[dec|inc]_stat family of
functions
On Wed 21-06-17 11:59:41, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> cc'ing Andrew and Jan and cc'ing whole body. The original patch
> posting can be found at
>
> https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=149802995611259&q=raw
>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:25:37AM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> > Currently the writeback statistics code uses a percpu counters to hold
> > various statistics. Furthermore we have 2 families of functions - those which
> > disable local irq and those which doesn't and whose names begin with
> > double underscore. However, they both end up calling __add_wb_stats which in
> > turn calls percpu_counter_add_batch which is already irq-safe.
> >
> > Exploiting this fact allows to eliminated the __wb_* functions since they don't
> > add any further protection than we already have. Furthermore, refactor
> > the wb_* function to call __add_wb_stat directly without the irq-disabling
> > dance. This will likely result in better runtime of code which deals with
> > modifying the stat counters.
> >
> > While at it also document why percpu_counter_add_batch is in fact preempt and
> > irq-safe since at least 3 people got confused.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>
>
> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
>
> Andrew, this looks good to me. If you're okay with it, can you take
> it through -mm? If not, I can take it through percpu although that'd
> be a bit of stretch.
The patch looks good to me as well. You can add:
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Honza
>
> Thanks.
>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes since v2:
> > * Fixed build failure reported by kbuild test robot
> > * Explicitly document that percpu_counter_add_batch is preempt/irq safe
> > fs/fs-writeback.c | 8 ++++----
> > include/linux/backing-dev.h | 24 ++----------------------
> > lib/percpu_counter.c | 7 +++++++
> > mm/page-writeback.c | 10 +++++-----
> > 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > index 63ee2940775c..309364aab2a5 100644
> > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> > @@ -380,8 +380,8 @@ static void inode_switch_wbs_work_fn(struct work_struct *work)
> > struct page *page = radix_tree_deref_slot_protected(slot,
> > &mapping->tree_lock);
> > if (likely(page) && PageDirty(page)) {
> > - __dec_wb_stat(old_wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
> > - __inc_wb_stat(new_wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
> > + dec_wb_stat(old_wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
> > + inc_wb_stat(new_wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > @@ -391,8 +391,8 @@ static void inode_switch_wbs_work_fn(struct work_struct *work)
> > &mapping->tree_lock);
> > if (likely(page)) {
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(!PageWriteback(page));
> > - __dec_wb_stat(old_wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
> > - __inc_wb_stat(new_wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
> > + dec_wb_stat(old_wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
> > + inc_wb_stat(new_wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/backing-dev.h b/include/linux/backing-dev.h
> > index ace73f96eb1e..e9c967b86054 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/backing-dev.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/backing-dev.h
> > @@ -69,34 +69,14 @@ static inline void __add_wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb,
> > percpu_counter_add_batch(&wb->stat[item], amount, WB_STAT_BATCH);
> > }
> >
> > -static inline void __inc_wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb,
> > - enum wb_stat_item item)
> > -{
> > - __add_wb_stat(wb, item, 1);
> > -}
> > -
> > static inline void inc_wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb, enum wb_stat_item item)
> > {
> > - unsigned long flags;
> > -
> > - local_irq_save(flags);
> > - __inc_wb_stat(wb, item);
> > - local_irq_restore(flags);
> > -}
> > -
> > -static inline void __dec_wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb,
> > - enum wb_stat_item item)
> > -{
> > - __add_wb_stat(wb, item, -1);
> > + __add_wb_stat(wb, item, 1);
> > }
> >
> > static inline void dec_wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb, enum wb_stat_item item)
> > {
> > - unsigned long flags;
> > -
> > - local_irq_save(flags);
> > - __dec_wb_stat(wb, item);
> > - local_irq_restore(flags);
> > + __add_wb_stat(wb, item, -1);
> > }
> >
> > static inline s64 wb_stat(struct bdi_writeback *wb, enum wb_stat_item item)
> > diff --git a/lib/percpu_counter.c b/lib/percpu_counter.c
> > index 8ee7e5ec21be..3bf4a9984f4c 100644
> > --- a/lib/percpu_counter.c
> > +++ b/lib/percpu_counter.c
> > @@ -72,6 +72,13 @@ void percpu_counter_set(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(percpu_counter_set);
> >
> > +/**
> > + * This function is both preempt and irq safe. The former is due to explicit
> > + * preemption disable. The latter is guaranteed by the fact that the slow path
> > + * is explicitly protected by an irq-safe spinlock whereas the fast patch uses
> > + * this_cpu_add which is irq-safe by definition. Hence there is no need muck
> > + * with irq state before calling this one
> > + */
> > void percpu_counter_add_batch(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount, s32 batch)
> > {
> > s64 count;
> > diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> > index 143c1c25d680..b7451891959a 100644
> > --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> > +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> > @@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ static inline void __wb_writeout_inc(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
> > {
> > struct wb_domain *cgdom;
> >
> > - __inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_WRITTEN);
> > + inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_WRITTEN);
> > wb_domain_writeout_inc(&global_wb_domain, &wb->completions,
> > wb->bdi->max_prop_frac);
> >
> > @@ -2437,8 +2437,8 @@ void account_page_dirtied(struct page *page, struct address_space *mapping)
> > __inc_node_page_state(page, NR_FILE_DIRTY);
> > __inc_zone_page_state(page, NR_ZONE_WRITE_PENDING);
> > __inc_node_page_state(page, NR_DIRTIED);
> > - __inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
> > - __inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_DIRTIED);
> > + inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_RECLAIMABLE);
> > + inc_wb_stat(wb, WB_DIRTIED);
> > task_io_account_write(PAGE_SIZE);
> > current->nr_dirtied++;
> > this_cpu_inc(bdp_ratelimits);
> > @@ -2745,7 +2745,7 @@ int test_clear_page_writeback(struct page *page)
> > if (bdi_cap_account_writeback(bdi)) {
> > struct bdi_writeback *wb = inode_to_wb(inode);
> >
> > - __dec_wb_stat(wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
> > + dec_wb_stat(wb, WB_WRITEBACK);
> > __wb_writeout_inc(wb);
> > }
> > }
> > @@ -2791,7 +2791,7 @@ int __test_set_page_writeback(struct page *page, bool keep_write)
> > page_index(page),
> > PAGECACHE_TAG_WRITEBACK);
> > if (bdi_cap_account_writeback(bdi))
> > - __inc_wb_stat(inode_to_wb(inode), WB_WRITEBACK);
> > + inc_wb_stat(inode_to_wb(inode), WB_WRITEBACK);
> >
> > /*
> > * We can come through here when swapping anonymous
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> >
>
> --
> tejun
>
--
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
Powered by blists - more mailing lists