From: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch v2] vmscan: protect zone rotation stats by lru lock
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:17:38 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1228241858.6202.5.camel@lts-notebook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081202123453.GB6170@cmpxchg.org>
On Tue, 2008-12-02 at 13:34 +0100, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 05:09:45PM -0500, Lee Schermerhorn wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 16:46 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 03:00:35 +0100
> > > > Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> The zone's rotation statistics must not be accessed without the
> > > >> corresponding LRU lock held. Fix an unprotected write in
> > > >> shrink_active_list().
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I don't think it really matters. It's quite common in that code to do
> > > > unlocked, racy update to statistics such as this. Because on those
> > > > rare occasions where a race does happen, there's a small glitch in the
> > > > reclaim logic which nobody will notice anyway.
> > > >
> > > > Of course, this does need to be done with some care, to ensure the
> > > > glitch _will_ be small.
> > >
> > > Processing at most SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pages at once probably
> > > ensures that glitches will be small most of the time.
> > >
> > > The only way this could be a big problem is if we end up
> > > racing with the divide-by-two logic in get_scan_ratio,
> > > leaving the rotated pages a factor two higher than they
> > > should be.
> > >
> > > Putting all the writes to the stats under the LRU lock
> > > should ensure that never happens.
> >
> > And he's not actually adding a lock. Just moving the exiting one up to
> > include the stats update. The intervening pagevec, pgmoved and lru
> > initializations don't need to be under the lock, but that's probably not
> > a big deal?
>
> I did it like this to keep the diff as simple as possible and to not
> change existing code flow.
>
> Here is an alternate version that moves the safe stuff out of the
> locked region.
>
> tbh, I think it's worse.
As I said, I didn't think it was a big deal. I'm fine with the prior
version.
Lee
>
> Hannes
>
> ---
>
> The zone's rotation statistics must not be modified without the
> corresponding LRU lock held. Fix an unprotected write in
> shrink_active_list().
>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1249,21 +1249,21 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned
> }
>
> /*
> + * Move the pages to the [file or anon] inactive list.
> + */
> +
> + pagevec_init(&pvec, 1);
> + lru = LRU_BASE + file * LRU_FILE;
> +
> + spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> + /*
> * Count referenced pages from currently used mappings as
> * rotated, even though they are moved to the inactive list.
> * This helps balance scan pressure between file and anonymous
> * pages in get_scan_ratio.
> */
> zone->recent_rotated[!!file] += pgmoved;
> -
> - /*
> - * Move the pages to the [file or anon] inactive list.
> - */
> - pagevec_init(&pvec, 1);
> -
> pgmoved = 0;
> - lru = LRU_BASE + file * LRU_FILE;
> - spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> while (!list_empty(&l_inactive)) {
> page = lru_to_page(&l_inactive);
> prefetchw_prev_lru_page(page, &l_inactive, flags);
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-02 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-01 2:00 Johannes Weiner
2008-12-01 21:41 ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-01 21:46 ` Rik van Riel
2008-12-01 22:09 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-12-02 12:34 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-12-02 18:17 ` Lee Schermerhorn [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1228241858.6202.5.camel@lts-notebook \
--to=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox