From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: page_waitqueue() considered harmful
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 13:11:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160928111115.GS5016@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160928104500.GC3903@techsingularity.net>
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:45:00AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> tldr: Other than 32-bit vs 64-bit, I could not find anything obviously wrong.
Thanks, meanwhile I redid the patch based on the feedback from Nick and
Linus.
I know I ignored the 32bit issue, I figured we'd first see if it helps
at all before mucking about with that.
In any case, I don't mind doing a PG_waiters and also using it for the
PG_writeback thing. Just wasn't what I was thinking of when doing that
patch.
Re the naming of __unlock_page(), its the slow path continuation of
unlock_page(). But I'm not too bothered if people want to change the
name.
So the below boots and builds a kernel and must be equally perfect, then
again x86 has no-op smp_mb__{before,after}_atomic() so the lack of
barriers will not affect anything much. PowerPC, ARM and MIPS (among
others) will want testing.
---
include/linux/page-flags.h | 2 ++
include/linux/pagemap.h | 25 +++++++++----
include/trace/events/mmflags.h | 1 +
mm/filemap.c | 80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
4 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/page-flags.h b/include/linux/page-flags.h
index 74e4dda..0ed3900 100644
--- a/include/linux/page-flags.h
+++ b/include/linux/page-flags.h
@@ -73,6 +73,7 @@
*/
enum pageflags {
PG_locked, /* Page is locked. Don't touch. */
+ PG_contended, /* Page lock is contended. */
PG_error,
PG_referenced,
PG_uptodate,
@@ -253,6 +254,7 @@ static inline int TestClearPage##uname(struct page *page) { return 0; }
TESTSETFLAG_FALSE(uname) TESTCLEARFLAG_FALSE(uname)
__PAGEFLAG(Locked, locked, PF_NO_TAIL)
+PAGEFLAG(Contended, contended, PF_NO_TAIL)
PAGEFLAG(Error, error, PF_NO_COMPOUND) TESTCLEARFLAG(Error, error, PF_NO_COMPOUND)
PAGEFLAG(Referenced, referenced, PF_HEAD)
TESTCLEARFLAG(Referenced, referenced, PF_HEAD)
diff --git a/include/linux/pagemap.h b/include/linux/pagemap.h
index 66a1260..c8b8651 100644
--- a/include/linux/pagemap.h
+++ b/include/linux/pagemap.h
@@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ extern void __lock_page(struct page *page);
extern int __lock_page_killable(struct page *page);
extern int __lock_page_or_retry(struct page *page, struct mm_struct *mm,
unsigned int flags);
-extern void unlock_page(struct page *page);
+extern void __unlock_page(struct page *page);
static inline int trylock_page(struct page *page)
{
@@ -448,6 +448,20 @@ static inline int lock_page_killable(struct page *page)
return 0;
}
+static inline void unlock_page(struct page *page)
+{
+ page = compound_head(page);
+ VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageLocked(page), page);
+ clear_bit_unlock(PG_locked, &page->flags);
+ /*
+ * Since PG_locked and PG_contended are in the same word, Program-Order
+ * ensures the load of PG_contended must not observe a value earlier
+ * than our clear_bit() store. See lock_page_wait().
+ */
+ if (PageContended(page))
+ __unlock_page(page);
+}
+
/*
* lock_page_or_retry - Lock the page, unless this would block and the
* caller indicated that it can handle a retry.
@@ -472,11 +486,11 @@ extern int wait_on_page_bit_killable(struct page *page, int bit_nr);
extern int wait_on_page_bit_killable_timeout(struct page *page,
int bit_nr, unsigned long timeout);
+extern int wait_on_page_lock(struct page *page, int mode);
+
static inline int wait_on_page_locked_killable(struct page *page)
{
- if (!PageLocked(page))
- return 0;
- return wait_on_page_bit_killable(compound_head(page), PG_locked);
+ return wait_on_page_lock(page, TASK_KILLABLE);
}
extern wait_queue_head_t *page_waitqueue(struct page *page);
@@ -494,8 +508,7 @@ static inline void wake_up_page(struct page *page, int bit)
*/
static inline void wait_on_page_locked(struct page *page)
{
- if (PageLocked(page))
- wait_on_page_bit(compound_head(page), PG_locked);
+ wait_on_page_lock(page, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
}
/*
diff --git a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
index 5a81ab4..18b8398 100644
--- a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
@@ -81,6 +81,7 @@
#define __def_pageflag_names \
{1UL << PG_locked, "locked" }, \
+ {1UL << PG_contended, "contended" }, \
{1UL << PG_error, "error" }, \
{1UL << PG_referenced, "referenced" }, \
{1UL << PG_uptodate, "uptodate" }, \
diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
index 8a287df..79aab60 100644
--- a/mm/filemap.c
+++ b/mm/filemap.c
@@ -847,15 +847,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(add_page_wait_queue);
* The mb is necessary to enforce ordering between the clear_bit and the read
* of the waitqueue (to avoid SMP races with a parallel wait_on_page_locked()).
*/
-void unlock_page(struct page *page)
+void __unlock_page(struct page *page)
{
- page = compound_head(page);
- VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageLocked(page), page);
- clear_bit_unlock(PG_locked, &page->flags);
- smp_mb__after_atomic();
- wake_up_page(page, PG_locked);
+ struct wait_bit_key key = __WAIT_BIT_KEY_INITIALIZER(&page->flags, PG_locked);
+ wait_queue_head_t *wq = page_waitqueue(page);
+
+ if (waitqueue_active(wq))
+ __wake_up(wq, TASK_NORMAL, 1, &key);
+ else
+ ClearPageContended(page);
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(unlock_page);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(__unlock_page);
/**
* end_page_writeback - end writeback against a page
@@ -908,6 +910,54 @@ void page_endio(struct page *page, bool is_write, int err)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(page_endio);
+static int lock_page_wait(struct wait_bit_key *word, int mode)
+{
+ struct page *page = container_of(word->flags, struct page, flags);
+
+ /*
+ * We cannot go sleep without having PG_contended set. This would mean
+ * nobody would issue a wakeup and we'd be stuck.
+ */
+ if (!PageContended(page)) {
+ SetPageContended(page);
+
+ /*
+ * There are two orderings of importance:
+ *
+ * 1)
+ *
+ * [unlock] [wait]
+ *
+ * clear PG_locked set PG_contended
+ * test PG_contended test (and-set) PG_locked
+ *
+ * Since these are on the same word, and the clear/set
+ * operation are atomic, they are ordered against one another.
+ * Program-Order further constraints a CPU from speculating the
+ * later load to not be earlier than the RmW. So this doesn't
+ * need an explicit barrier. Also see unlock_page().
+ *
+ * 2)
+ *
+ * [unlock] [wait]
+ *
+ * test PG_contended set PG_contended
+ * wakeup/remove add
+ * clear PG_contended trylock
+ * sleep
+ *
+ * In this case however, we must ensure PG_contended is set
+ * before we add ourselves to the list, such that unlock() must
+ * either see PG_contended or we see its clear.
+ */
+ smp_mb__after_atomic();
+
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ return bit_wait_io(word, mode);
+}
+
/**
* __lock_page - get a lock on the page, assuming we need to sleep to get it
* @page: the page to lock
@@ -917,7 +967,7 @@ void __lock_page(struct page *page)
struct page *page_head = compound_head(page);
DEFINE_WAIT_BIT(wait, &page_head->flags, PG_locked);
- __wait_on_bit_lock(page_waitqueue(page_head), &wait, bit_wait_io,
+ __wait_on_bit_lock(page_waitqueue(page_head), &wait, lock_page_wait,
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(__lock_page);
@@ -928,10 +978,22 @@ int __lock_page_killable(struct page *page)
DEFINE_WAIT_BIT(wait, &page_head->flags, PG_locked);
return __wait_on_bit_lock(page_waitqueue(page_head), &wait,
- bit_wait_io, TASK_KILLABLE);
+ lock_page_wait, TASK_KILLABLE);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__lock_page_killable);
+int wait_on_page_lock(struct page *page, int mode)
+{
+ struct page __always_unused *__page = (page = compound_head(page));
+ DEFINE_WAIT_BIT(wait, &page->flags, PG_locked);
+
+ if (!PageLocked(page))
+ return 0;
+
+ return __wait_on_bit(page_waitqueue(page), &wait, lock_page_wait, mode);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(wait_on_page_lock);
+
/*
* Return values:
* 1 - page is locked; mmap_sem is still held.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-28 11:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-26 20:58 Linus Torvalds
2016-09-26 21:23 ` Rik van Riel
2016-09-26 21:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-09-26 23:11 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2016-09-27 1:01 ` Rik van Riel
2016-09-27 7:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-27 8:54 ` Mel Gorman
2016-09-27 9:11 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2016-09-27 9:42 ` Mel Gorman
2016-09-27 9:52 ` Minchan Kim
2016-09-27 12:11 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2016-09-29 8:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-29 12:55 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-29 13:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-29 13:54 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-29 15:05 ` Rik van Riel
2016-09-27 8:03 ` Jan Kara
2016-09-27 8:31 ` Mel Gorman
2016-09-27 14:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-27 15:08 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-27 16:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-09-27 16:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-28 10:45 ` Mel Gorman
2016-09-28 11:11 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-09-28 16:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-09-29 13:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-03 10:47 ` Mel Gorman
2016-09-27 14:53 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-27 15:17 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-27 16:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-27 17:06 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-28 7:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-28 11:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-09-28 11:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-28 12:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-09-29 1:31 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-29 2:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-09-29 6:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-29 6:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-09-29 7:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-29 7:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-28 7:40 ` Mel Gorman
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=20160928111115.GS5016@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--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