linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] test_xarray: add tests for advanced multi-index use

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: <ZbQW3PRAIw8e7m0m@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 20:32:28 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
	Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev,
	lkp@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"gost.dev@...sung.com" <gost.dev@...sung.com>,
	Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] test_xarray: add tests for advanced multi-index use

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 12:04:44PM -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > We have a perfectly good system for "relaxing":
> > 
> >         xas_for_each_marked(&xas, page, end, PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY) {
> >                 xas_set_mark(&xas, PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE);
> >                 if (++tagged % XA_CHECK_SCHED)
> >                         continue;
> > 
> >                 xas_pause(&xas);
> >                 xas_unlock_irq(&xas);
> >                 cond_resched();
> >                 xas_lock_irq(&xas);
> >         }
> 
> And yet we can get a soft lockup with order 20 (1,048,576 entries),
> granted busy looping over 1 million entries is insane, but it seems it
> the existing code may not be enough to avoid the soft lockup. Also
> cond_resched() may be eventually removed [0].

what?  you're in charge of when you sleep.  you can do this:

unsigned i = 0;
rcu_read_lock();
xas_for_each(...) {
	...
	if (iter++ % XA_CHECK_SCHED)
		continue;
	xas_pause();
	rcu_read_unlock();
	rcu_read_lock();
}
rcu_read_unlock();

and that will get rid of the rcu warnings.  right?