linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] mm/swap: optimize swap cache search space

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: <87o79zsdku.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 10:24:01 +0800
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Kairui Song <ryncsn@...il.com>,  linux-mm@...ck.org,  Kairui Song
 <kasong@...cent.com>,  Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,  Chris
 Li <chrisl@...nel.org>,  Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>,  Ryan Roberts
 <ryan.roberts@....com>,  Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,  Minchan Kim
 <minchan@...nel.org>,  Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,  David Hildenbrand
 <david@...hat.com>,  Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>,
  linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] mm/swap: optimize swap cache search space

Hi, Matthew,

Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> writes:

> On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 03:54:58PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> Is it possible to add "start_offset" support in xarray, so "index"
>> will subtract "start_offset" before looking up / inserting?
>
> We kind of have that with XA_FLAGS_ZERO_BUSY which is used for
> XA_FLAGS_ALLOC1.  But that's just one bit for the entry at 0.  We could
> generalise it, but then we'd have to store that somewhere and there's
> no obvious good place to store it that wouldn't enlarge struct xarray,
> which I'd be reluctant to do.
>
>> Is it possible to use multiple range locks to protect one xarray to
>> improve the lock scalability?  This is why we have multiple "struct
>> address_space" for one swap device.  And, we may have same lock
>> contention issue for large files too.
>
> It's something I've considered.  The issue is search marks.  If we delete
> an entry, we may have to walk all the way up the xarray clearing bits as
> we go and I'd rather not grab a lock at each level.  There's a convenient
> 4 byte hole between nr_values and parent where we could put it.
>
> Oh, another issue is that we use i_pages.xa_lock to synchronise
> address_space.nrpages, so I'm not sure that a per-node lock will help.

Thanks for looking at this.

> But I'm conscious that there are workloads which show contention on
> xa_lock as their limiting factor, so I'm open to ideas to improve all
> these things.

I have no idea so far because my very limited knowledge about xarray.

--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying