linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 07/11] mm: vmalloc: Offload free_vmap_area

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: <Zd8mcuZeHKJJIjrj@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 20:26:26 +0800
From: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
	"Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
	Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...y.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/11] mm: vmalloc: Offload free_vmap_area_lock lock

On 02/28/24 at 11:39am, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 05:48:53PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> > On 01/02/24 at 07:46pm, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> > .....snip...
> > > +static void
> > > +decay_va_pool_node(struct vmap_node *vn, bool full_decay)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct vmap_area *va, *nva;
> > > +	struct list_head decay_list;
> > > +	struct rb_root decay_root;
> > > +	unsigned long n_decay;
> > > +	int i;
> > > +
> > > +	decay_root = RB_ROOT;
> > > +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&decay_list);
> > > +
> > > +	for (i = 0; i < MAX_VA_SIZE_PAGES; i++) {
> > > +		struct list_head tmp_list;
> > > +
> > > +		if (list_empty(&vn->pool[i].head))
> > > +			continue;
> > > +
> > > +		INIT_LIST_HEAD(&tmp_list);
> > > +
> > > +		/* Detach the pool, so no-one can access it. */
> > > +		spin_lock(&vn->pool_lock);
> > > +		list_replace_init(&vn->pool[i].head, &tmp_list);
> > > +		spin_unlock(&vn->pool_lock);
> > > +
> > > +		if (full_decay)
> > > +			WRITE_ONCE(vn->pool[i].len, 0);
> > > +
> > > +		/* Decay a pool by ~25% out of left objects. */
> > 
> > This isn't true if the pool has less than 4 objects. If there are 3
> > objects, n_decay = 0.
> > 
> This is expectable.


> 
> > > +		n_decay = vn->pool[i].len >> 2;
> > > +
> > > +		list_for_each_entry_safe(va, nva, &tmp_list, list) {
> > > +			list_del_init(&va->list);
> > > +			merge_or_add_vmap_area(va, &decay_root, &decay_list);
> > > +
> > > +			if (!full_decay) {
> > > +				WRITE_ONCE(vn->pool[i].len, vn->pool[i].len - 1);
> > > +
> > > +				if (!--n_decay)
> > > +					break;
> > 
> >                                Here, --n_decay will make n_decay 0xffffffffffffffff,
> >                                then all left objects are reclaimed.
> Right. Last three objects do not play a big game.

See it now, thanks.