[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3b116359-d346-a63c-1a78-f95ad1912dfe@samsung.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2023 13:19:49 +0200
From: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
CC: <martin@...ibond.com>, <axboe@...nel.dk>,
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <hubcap@...ibond.com>,
<willy@...radead.org>, <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
<senozhatsky@...omium.org>, <brauner@...nel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
<mcgrof@...nel.org>, <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
<gost.dev@...sung.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<devel@...ts.orangefs.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] zram: remove the call to page_endio in the bio
end_io handler
On 2023-03-31 00:51, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 01:27:12PM +0200, Pankaj Raghav wrote:
>> zram_page_end_io function is called when alloc_page is used (for
>> partial IO) to trigger writeback from the user space. The pages used for
>
> No, it was used with zram_rw_page since rw_page didn't carry the bio.
>
>> this operation is never locked or have the writeback set. So, it is safe
>
> VM had the page lock and wait to unlock.
>
>> to remove the call to page_endio() function that unlocks or marks
>> writeback end on the page.
>>
>> Rename the endio handler from zram_page_end_io to zram_read_end_io as
>> the call to page_endio() is removed and to associate the callback to the
>> operation it is used in.
>
I revisited the code again. Let me know if I got it right.
When we trigger writeback, we will always call zram_bvec_read() only if
ZRAM_WB is not set. That means we will only call zram_read_from_zspool() in
__zram_bvec_read when parent bio set to NULL.
static ssize_t writeback_store(struct device *dev, ...
{
if (zram_test_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_WB) ||
zram_test_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_SAME) ||
zram_test_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_UNDER_WB))
goto next;
...
if (zram_bvec_read(zram, &bvec, index, 0, NULL)) {
...
}
static int __zram_bvec_read(struct zram *zram, struct page *page, u32 index,
struct bio *bio, bool partial_io)
{
....
if (!zram_test_flag(zram, index, ZRAM_WB)) {
/* Slot should be locked through out the function call */
ret = zram_read_from_zspool(zram, page, index);
zram_slot_unlock(zram, index);
} else {
/* Slot should be unlocked before the function call */
zram_slot_unlock(zram, index);
ret = zram_bvec_read_from_bdev(zram, page, index, bio,
partial_io);
}
....
}
> Since zram removed the rw_page and IO comes with bio from now on,
> IIUC, we are fine since every IO will go with chained-IO. Right?
>
We will never call zram_bvec_read_from_bdev() with parent bio set to NULL. IOW, we will always
only hit the bio_chain case in read_from_bdev_async. So we could do the following?:
diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
index b7bb52f8dfbd..2341f4009b0f 100644
--- a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
@@ -606,15 +606,6 @@ static void free_block_bdev(struct zram *zram, unsigned long blk_idx)
atomic64_dec(&zram->stats.bd_count);
}
-static void zram_page_end_io(struct bio *bio)
-{
- struct page *page = bio_first_page_all(bio);
-
- page_endio(page, op_is_write(bio_op(bio)),
- blk_status_to_errno(bio->bi_status));
- bio_put(bio);
-}
-
/*
* Returns 1 if the submission is successful.
*/
@@ -634,9 +625,7 @@ static int read_from_bdev_async(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec,
return -EIO;
}
- if (!parent)
- bio->bi_end_io = zram_page_end_io;
- else
+ if (parent)
bio_chain(bio, parent);
submit_bio(bio);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists