linux-kernel - [PATCH] mm: do not call add_nr

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20220416004104.4089743-1-roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Date:   Fri, 15 Apr 2022 17:41:04 -0700
From:   Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
To:     linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
Subject: [PATCH] mm: do not call add_nr_deferred() with zero deferred

add_nr_deferred() is often called with next_deferred equal to 0.
For instance, it's happening under low memory pressure for any
shrinkers with a low number of cached objects. A corresponding trace
looks like:
  <...>-619914 [005] .... 467456.345160: mm_shrink_slab_end: \
  super_cache_scan+0x0/0x1a0 0000000087027f06: nid: 1	     \
  unused scan count 0 new scan count 0 total_scan 0	     \
  last shrinker return val 0

  <...>-619914 [005] .... 467456.345371: mm_shrink_slab_end: \
  super_cache_scan+0x0/0x1a0 0000000087027f06: nid: 1	     \
  unused scan count 0 new scan count 0 total_scan 0	     \
  last shrinker return val 0

  <...>-619914 [005] .... 467456.345380: mm_shrink_slab_end: \
  super_cache_scan+0x0/0x1a0 0000000087027f06: nid: 1 unused \
  scan count 0 new scan count 0 total_scan 0	             \
  last shrinker return val 0

This lead to unnecessary checks and atomic operations, which can be
avoided by checking next_deferred for not being zero before calling
add_nr_deferred(). In this case the mm_shrink_slab_end trace point
will get a potentially slightly outdated "new scan count" value, but
it's totally fine.

Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>
---
 mm/vmscan.c | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index d4a7d2bd276d..19d3d4fa1aad 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -808,7 +808,10 @@ static unsigned long do_shrink_slab(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
 	 * move the unused scan count back into the shrinker in a
 	 * manner that handles concurrent updates.
 	 */
-	new_nr = add_nr_deferred(next_deferred, shrinker, shrinkctl);
+	if (next_deferred)
+		new_nr = add_nr_deferred(next_deferred, shrinker, shrinkctl);
+	else
+		new_nr = nr;
 
 	trace_mm_shrink_slab_end(shrinker, shrinkctl->nid, freed, nr, new_nr, total_scan);
 	return freed;
-- 
2.35.1