linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 15/18] mm, fs, dax: handle layout changes to pinned dax mappings

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: <CAPcyv4h3RPdohsPyiB=GxE8iQCjRRen=knDd=Em5BMy1MYpRvA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Apr 2018 15:03:51 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
        Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh.triplett@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 15/18] mm, fs, dax: handle layout changes to pinned dax mappings

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:51 AM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
>> On Sat 07-04-18 12:38:24, Dan Williams wrote:
> [..]
>>> I wonder if this can be trivially solved by using srcu. I.e. we don't
>>> need to wait for a global quiescent state, just a
>>> get_user_pages_fast() quiescent state. ...or is that an abuse of the
>>> srcu api?
>>
>> Well, I'd rather use the percpu rwsemaphore (linux/percpu-rwsem.h) than
>> SRCU. It is a more-or-less standard locking mechanism rather than relying
>> on implementation properties of SRCU which is a data structure protection
>> method. And the overhead of percpu rwsemaphore for your use case should be
>> about the same as that of SRCU.
>
> I was just about to ask that. Yes, it seems they would share similar
> properties and it would be better to use the explicit implementation
> rather than a side effect of srcu.

...unfortunately:

 BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
./include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h:34
 [..]
 Call Trace:
  dump_stack+0x85/0xcb
  ___might_sleep+0x15b/0x240
  dax_layout_lock+0x18/0x80
  get_user_pages_fast+0xf8/0x140

...and thinking about it more srcu is a better fit. We don't need the
100% exclusion provided by an rwsem we only need the guarantee that
all cpus that might have been running get_user_pages_fast() have
finished it at least once.

In my tests synchronize_srcu is a bit slower than unpatched for the
trivial 100 truncate test, but certainly not the 200x latency you were
seeing with syncrhonize_rcu.

Elapsed time:
0.006149178 unpatched
0.009426360 srcu