| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:03:32 +1300
From: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
To: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@...sulko.com>,
Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>, Chris Li <chriscli@...gle.com>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>, Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] mm/zswap: reuse dstmem when decompress
On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 7:32 PM Chengming Zhou
<zhouchengming@...edance.com> wrote:
>
> On 2023/12/27 09:24, Barry Song wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 4:56 AM Chengming Zhou
> > <zhouchengming@...edance.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> In the !zpool_can_sleep_mapped() case such as zsmalloc, we need to first
> >> copy the entry->handle memory to a temporary memory, which is allocated
> >> using kmalloc.
> >>
> >> Obviously we can reuse the per-compressor dstmem to avoid allocating
> >> every time, since it's percpu-compressor and protected in percpu mutex.
> >
> > what is the benefit of this since we are actually increasing lock contention
> > by reusing this buffer between multiple compression and decompression
> > threads?
>
> This mutex is already reused in all compress/decompress paths even before
> the reuse optimization. I think the best way maybe to use separate crypto_acomp
> for compression and decompression.
>
> Do you think the lock contention will be increased because we now put zpool_map_handle()
> and memcpy() in the lock section? Actually, we can move zpool_map_handle() before
> the lock section if needed, but that memcpy() should be protected in lock section.
>
> >
> > this mainly affects zsmalloc which can't sleep? do we have performance
> > data?
>
> Right, last time when test I remembered there is very minor performance difference.
> The main benefit here is to simply the code much and delete one failure case.
ok.
For the majority of hardware, people are using CPU-based
compression/decompression,
there is no chance they will sleep. Thus, all
compression/decompression can be done
in a zpool_map section, there is *NO* need to copy at all! Only for
those hardware which
can provide a HW-accelerator to offload CPU, crypto will actually wait
for completion by
static inline int crypto_wait_req(int err, struct crypto_wait *wait)
{
switch (err) {
case -EINPROGRESS:
case -EBUSY:
wait_for_completion(&wait->completion);
reinit_completion(&wait->completion);
err = wait->err;
break;
}
return err;
}
for CPU-based alg, we have completed the compr/decompr within
crypto_acomp_decompress()
synchronously. they won't return EINPROGRESS, EBUSY.
The problem is that crypto_acomp won't expose this information to its
users. if it does,
we can use this info, we will totally avoid the code of copying
zsmalloc's data to a tmp
buffer for the most majority users of zswap.
But I am not sure if we can find a way to convince Herbert(+To) :-)
>
> >
> > and it seems this patch is also negatively affecting z3fold and zbud.c
> > which actually don't need to allocate a tmp buffer.
> >
>
> As for z3fold and zbud, the influence should be much less since the only difference
> here is zpool_map_handle() moved in lock section, which could be moved out if needed
> as noted above. And also no evident performance regression in the testing.
>
> Thanks.
>
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>
> >> Acked-by: Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org> (Google)
> >> Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@...edance.com>
> >> ---
> >> mm/zswap.c | 44 ++++++++++++--------------------------------
> >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/mm/zswap.c b/mm/zswap.c
> >> index 976f278aa507..6b872744e962 100644
> >> --- a/mm/zswap.c
> >> +++ b/mm/zswap.c
> >> @@ -1417,19 +1417,13 @@ static int zswap_writeback_entry(struct zswap_entry *entry,
> >> struct crypto_acomp_ctx *acomp_ctx;
> >> struct zpool *pool = zswap_find_zpool(entry);
> >> bool page_was_allocated;
> >> - u8 *src, *tmp = NULL;
> >> + u8 *src;
> >> unsigned int dlen;
> >> int ret;
> >> struct writeback_control wbc = {
> >> .sync_mode = WB_SYNC_NONE,
> >> };
> >>
> >> - if (!zpool_can_sleep_mapped(pool)) {
> >> - tmp = kmalloc(PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> >> - if (!tmp)
> >> - return -ENOMEM;
> >> - }
> >> -
> >> /* try to allocate swap cache page */
> >> mpol = get_task_policy(current);
> >> page = __read_swap_cache_async(swpentry, GFP_KERNEL, mpol,
> >> @@ -1465,15 +1459,15 @@ static int zswap_writeback_entry(struct zswap_entry *entry,
> >> /* decompress */
> >> acomp_ctx = raw_cpu_ptr(entry->pool->acomp_ctx);
> >> dlen = PAGE_SIZE;
> >> + mutex_lock(acomp_ctx->mutex);
> >>
> >> src = zpool_map_handle(pool, entry->handle, ZPOOL_MM_RO);
> >> if (!zpool_can_sleep_mapped(pool)) {
> >> - memcpy(tmp, src, entry->length);
> >> - src = tmp;
> >> + memcpy(acomp_ctx->dstmem, src, entry->length);
> >> + src = acomp_ctx->dstmem;
> >> zpool_unmap_handle(pool, entry->handle);
> >> }
> >>
> >> - mutex_lock(acomp_ctx->mutex);
> >> sg_init_one(&input, src, entry->length);
> >> sg_init_table(&output, 1);
> >> sg_set_page(&output, page, PAGE_SIZE, 0);
> >> @@ -1482,9 +1476,7 @@ static int zswap_writeback_entry(struct zswap_entry *entry,
> >> dlen = acomp_ctx->req->dlen;
> >> mutex_unlock(acomp_ctx->mutex);
> >>
> >> - if (!zpool_can_sleep_mapped(pool))
> >> - kfree(tmp);
> >> - else
> >> + if (zpool_can_sleep_mapped(pool))
> >> zpool_unmap_handle(pool, entry->handle);
> >>
> >> BUG_ON(ret);
> >> @@ -1508,9 +1500,6 @@ static int zswap_writeback_entry(struct zswap_entry *entry,
> >> return ret;
> >>
> >> fail:
> >> - if (!zpool_can_sleep_mapped(pool))
> >> - kfree(tmp);
> >> -
> >> /*
> >> * If we get here because the page is already in swapcache, a
> >> * load may be happening concurrently. It is safe and okay to
> >> @@ -1771,7 +1760,7 @@ bool zswap_load(struct folio *folio)
> >> struct zswap_entry *entry;
> >> struct scatterlist input, output;
> >> struct crypto_acomp_ctx *acomp_ctx;
> >> - u8 *src, *dst, *tmp;
> >> + u8 *src, *dst;
> >> struct zpool *zpool;
> >> unsigned int dlen;
> >> bool ret;
> >> @@ -1796,26 +1785,19 @@ bool zswap_load(struct folio *folio)
> >> }
> >>
> >> zpool = zswap_find_zpool(entry);
> >> - if (!zpool_can_sleep_mapped(zpool)) {
> >> - tmp = kmalloc(entry->length, GFP_KERNEL);
> >> - if (!tmp) {
> >> - ret = false;
> >> - goto freeentry;
> >> - }
> >> - }
> >>
> >> /* decompress */
> >> dlen = PAGE_SIZE;
> >> - src = zpool_map_handle(zpool, entry->handle, ZPOOL_MM_RO);
> >> + acomp_ctx = raw_cpu_ptr(entry->pool->acomp_ctx);
> >> + mutex_lock(acomp_ctx->mutex);
> >>
> >> + src = zpool_map_handle(zpool, entry->handle, ZPOOL_MM_RO);
> >> if (!zpool_can_sleep_mapped(zpool)) {
> >> - memcpy(tmp, src, entry->length);
> >> - src = tmp;
> >> + memcpy(acomp_ctx->dstmem, src, entry->length);
> >> + src = acomp_ctx->dstmem;
> >> zpool_unmap_handle(zpool, entry->handle);
> >> }
> >>
> >> - acomp_ctx = raw_cpu_ptr(entry->pool->acomp_ctx);
> >> - mutex_lock(acomp_ctx->mutex);
> >> sg_init_one(&input, src, entry->length);
> >> sg_init_table(&output, 1);
> >> sg_set_page(&output, page, PAGE_SIZE, 0);
> >> @@ -1826,15 +1808,13 @@ bool zswap_load(struct folio *folio)
> >>
> >> if (zpool_can_sleep_mapped(zpool))
> >> zpool_unmap_handle(zpool, entry->handle);
> >> - else
> >> - kfree(tmp);
> >>
> >> ret = true;
> >> stats:
> >> count_vm_event(ZSWPIN);
> >> if (entry->objcg)
> >> count_objcg_event(entry->objcg, ZSWPIN);
> >> -freeentry:
> >> +
> >> spin_lock(&tree->lock);
> >> if (ret && zswap_exclusive_loads_enabled) {
> >> zswap_invalidate_entry(tree, entry);
> >>
> >> --
> >> b4 0.10.1
> >>
Thanks
Barry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists