| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Z6zJ-3exkKoj5n2D@google.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 16:19:07 +0000
From: Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kairui Song <ryncsn@...il.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 10/18] zsmalloc: factor out pool locking helpers
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 04:18:14PM +0000, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 03:27:08PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > We currently have a mix of migrate_{read,write}_lock() helpers
> > that lock zspages, but it's zs_pool that actually has a ->migrate_lock
> > access to which is opene-coded. Factor out pool migrate locking
> > into helpers, zspage migration locking API will be renamed to
> > reduce confusion.
> >
> > It's worth mentioning that zsmalloc locks sync not only migration,
> > but also compaction.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
>
> FWIW I don't see a lot of value in the helpers (renaming the lock is
> useful tho). We open-code other locks like the class lock anyway, and
> the helpers obscure the underlying lock type without adding much value
> in terms of readability/conciseness.
We use helpers for the class lock in the following change, but my point
stands for that too.
>
> > ---
> > mm/zsmalloc.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/zsmalloc.c b/mm/zsmalloc.c
> > index 6d0e47f7ae33..47c638df47c5 100644
> > --- a/mm/zsmalloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/zsmalloc.c
> > @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
> > /*
> > * lock ordering:
> > * page_lock
> > - * pool->migrate_lock
> > + * pool->lock
> > * class->lock
> > * zspage->lock
> > */
> > @@ -224,10 +224,35 @@ struct zs_pool {
> > struct work_struct free_work;
> > #endif
> > /* protect page/zspage migration */
> > - rwlock_t migrate_lock;
> > + rwlock_t lock;
> > atomic_t compaction_in_progress;
> > };
> >
> > +static void pool_write_unlock(struct zs_pool *pool)
> > +{
> > + write_unlock(&pool->lock);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void pool_write_lock(struct zs_pool *pool)
> > +{
> > + write_lock(&pool->lock);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void pool_read_unlock(struct zs_pool *pool)
> > +{
> > + read_unlock(&pool->lock);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void pool_read_lock(struct zs_pool *pool)
> > +{
> > + read_lock(&pool->lock);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static bool pool_lock_is_contended(struct zs_pool *pool)
> > +{
> > + return rwlock_is_contended(&pool->lock);
> > +}
> > +
> > static inline void zpdesc_set_first(struct zpdesc *zpdesc)
> > {
> > SetPagePrivate(zpdesc_page(zpdesc));
> > @@ -1206,7 +1231,7 @@ void *zs_map_object(struct zs_pool *pool, unsigned long handle,
> > BUG_ON(in_interrupt());
> >
> > /* It guarantees it can get zspage from handle safely */
> > - read_lock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_read_lock(pool);
> > obj = handle_to_obj(handle);
> > obj_to_location(obj, &zpdesc, &obj_idx);
> > zspage = get_zspage(zpdesc);
> > @@ -1218,7 +1243,7 @@ void *zs_map_object(struct zs_pool *pool, unsigned long handle,
> > * which is smaller granularity.
> > */
> > migrate_read_lock(zspage);
> > - read_unlock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_read_unlock(pool);
> >
> > class = zspage_class(pool, zspage);
> > off = offset_in_page(class->size * obj_idx);
> > @@ -1450,16 +1475,16 @@ void zs_free(struct zs_pool *pool, unsigned long handle)
> > return;
> >
> > /*
> > - * The pool->migrate_lock protects the race with zpage's migration
> > + * The pool->lock protects the race with zpage's migration
> > * so it's safe to get the page from handle.
> > */
> > - read_lock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_read_lock(pool);
> > obj = handle_to_obj(handle);
> > obj_to_zpdesc(obj, &f_zpdesc);
> > zspage = get_zspage(f_zpdesc);
> > class = zspage_class(pool, zspage);
> > spin_lock(&class->lock);
> > - read_unlock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_read_unlock(pool);
> >
> > class_stat_sub(class, ZS_OBJS_INUSE, 1);
> > obj_free(class->size, obj);
> > @@ -1793,10 +1818,10 @@ static int zs_page_migrate(struct page *newpage, struct page *page,
> > pool = zspage->pool;
> >
> > /*
> > - * The pool migrate_lock protects the race between zpage migration
> > + * The pool lock protects the race between zpage migration
> > * and zs_free.
> > */
> > - write_lock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_write_lock(pool);
> > class = zspage_class(pool, zspage);
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -1833,7 +1858,7 @@ static int zs_page_migrate(struct page *newpage, struct page *page,
> > * Since we complete the data copy and set up new zspage structure,
> > * it's okay to release migration_lock.
> > */
> > - write_unlock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_write_unlock(pool);
> > spin_unlock(&class->lock);
> > migrate_write_unlock(zspage);
> >
> > @@ -1956,7 +1981,7 @@ static unsigned long __zs_compact(struct zs_pool *pool,
> > * protect the race between zpage migration and zs_free
> > * as well as zpage allocation/free
> > */
> > - write_lock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_write_lock(pool);
> > spin_lock(&class->lock);
> > while (zs_can_compact(class)) {
> > int fg;
> > @@ -1983,14 +2008,14 @@ static unsigned long __zs_compact(struct zs_pool *pool,
> > src_zspage = NULL;
> >
> > if (get_fullness_group(class, dst_zspage) == ZS_INUSE_RATIO_100
> > - || rwlock_is_contended(&pool->migrate_lock)) {
> > + || pool_lock_is_contended(pool)) {
> > putback_zspage(class, dst_zspage);
> > dst_zspage = NULL;
> >
> > spin_unlock(&class->lock);
> > - write_unlock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_write_unlock(pool);
> > cond_resched();
> > - write_lock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_write_lock(pool);
> > spin_lock(&class->lock);
> > }
> > }
> > @@ -2002,7 +2027,7 @@ static unsigned long __zs_compact(struct zs_pool *pool,
> > putback_zspage(class, dst_zspage);
> >
> > spin_unlock(&class->lock);
> > - write_unlock(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + pool_write_unlock(pool);
> >
> > return pages_freed;
> > }
> > @@ -2014,10 +2039,10 @@ unsigned long zs_compact(struct zs_pool *pool)
> > unsigned long pages_freed = 0;
> >
> > /*
> > - * Pool compaction is performed under pool->migrate_lock so it is basically
> > + * Pool compaction is performed under pool->lock so it is basically
> > * single-threaded. Having more than one thread in __zs_compact()
> > - * will increase pool->migrate_lock contention, which will impact other
> > - * zsmalloc operations that need pool->migrate_lock.
> > + * will increase pool->lock contention, which will impact other
> > + * zsmalloc operations that need pool->lock.
> > */
> > if (atomic_xchg(&pool->compaction_in_progress, 1))
> > return 0;
> > @@ -2139,7 +2164,7 @@ struct zs_pool *zs_create_pool(const char *name)
> > return NULL;
> >
> > init_deferred_free(pool);
> > - rwlock_init(&pool->migrate_lock);
> > + rwlock_init(&pool->lock);
> > atomic_set(&pool->compaction_in_progress, 0);
> >
> > pool->name = kstrdup(name, GFP_KERNEL);
> > --
> > 2.48.1.502.g6dc24dfdaf-goog
> >
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists