[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <163703064452.25805.16932817889703270242.stgit@noble.brown>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 13:44:04 +1100
From: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc: linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 03/13] MM: reclaim mustn't enter FS for swap-over-NFS
If swap-out is using filesystem operations (SWP_FS_OPS), then it is not
safe to enter the FS for reclaim.
So only down-grade the requirement for swap pages to __GFP_IO after
checking that SWP_FS_OPS are not being used.
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 12 ++++++++++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index fb9584641ac7..049ff4494081 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1513,8 +1513,14 @@ static unsigned int shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
if (!sc->may_unmap && page_mapped(page))
goto keep_locked;
+ /* ->flags can be updated non-atomicially (scan_swap_map_slots),
+ * but that will never affect SWP_FS_OPS, so the data_race
+ * is safe.
+ */
may_enter_fs = (sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) ||
- (PageSwapCache(page) && (sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_IO));
+ (PageSwapCache(page) &&
+ !data_race(page_swap_info(page)->flags & SWP_FS_OPS) &&
+ (sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_IO));
/*
* The number of dirty pages determines if a node is marked
@@ -1682,7 +1688,9 @@ static unsigned int shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
goto activate_locked_split;
}
- may_enter_fs = true;
+ if ((sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) ||
+ !data_race(page_swap_info(page)->flags & SWP_FS_OPS))
+ may_enter_fs = true;
/* Adding to swap updated mapping */
mapping = page_mapping(page);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists