linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	 syzbot <syzbot+2fc0712f8f8b8b8fa0ef@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
	 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	 syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at mm/page-writeback.c:LINE!
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 18:04:21 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgD9GK5CeHopYmRHoYS9cNuCmDMsc=+MbM_KgJ0KB+=ng@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wh=5kDGukMs2sVZ8uHZJX4VL13oD5+xMAR4HvuY6QckLg@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1644 bytes --]

On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:53 AM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> I took your "way to go" statement as an ack, and made it all be commit
> c2407cf7d22d ("mm: make wait_on_page_writeback() wait for multiple
> pending writebacks").

Oh, and Michael Larabel (of phoronix) reports that that one-liner does
something bad to a few PostgreSQL tests, on the order of 5-10%
regression on some machines (but apparently not others).

I suspect that's a sign of instability in the benchmark numbers, but
it probably also means that we have some silly condition where
multiple threads want to clean the same page.

I sent him a patch to try if it ends up being better to just not wake
things up early at all (instead of the "if" -> "while") conversion.
That trivial patch appended here in case anybody has comments.

Just the fact that that one-liner made a performance impact makes me
go "hmm", though. Michael didn't see the BUG_ON(), so it's presumably
some _other_ user of wait_on_page_writeback() than the
write_cache_pages() one that causes issues.

Anybody got any suspicions? Honestly, when working on the page wait
queues, I was working under the assumption that it's really just the
page lock that truly matters.

I'm thinking things like __filemap_fdatawait_range(), which doesn't
hold the page lock at all, so it's all kinds of non-serialized, and
could now be waiting for any number of IO's ro complete..

Oh well. This email doesn't really have a point, it's more of a
heads-up that that "wait to see one or multiple writebacks" thing
seems to matter more than I would have expected for some loads..

            Linus

[-- Attachment #2: patch --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 1292 bytes --]

 mm/filemap.c        | 6 ++++--
 mm/page-writeback.c | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
index 5c9d564317a5..031d19d0f4b2 100644
--- a/mm/filemap.c
+++ b/mm/filemap.c
@@ -1052,14 +1052,16 @@ static int wake_page_function(wait_queue_entry_t *wait, unsigned mode, int sync,
 	if (!wake_page_match(wait_page, key))
 		return 0;
 
+	/* Stop walking if the bit was already taken */
+	if (test_bit(key->bit_nr, &key->page->flags))
+		return -1;
+
 	/*
 	 * If it's a lock handoff wait, we get the bit for it, and
 	 * stop walking (and do not wake it up) if we can't.
 	 */
 	flags = wait->flags;
 	if (flags & WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE) {
-		if (test_bit(key->bit_nr, &key->page->flags))
-			return -1;
 		if (flags & WQ_FLAG_CUSTOM) {
 			if (test_and_set_bit(key->bit_nr, &key->page->flags))
 				return -1;
diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
index eb34d204d4ee..586042472ac9 100644
--- a/mm/page-writeback.c
+++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
@@ -2826,7 +2826,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__test_set_page_writeback);
  */
 void wait_on_page_writeback(struct page *page)
 {
-	while (PageWriteback(page)) {
+	if (PageWriteback(page)) {
 		trace_wait_on_page_writeback(page, page_mapping(page));
 		wait_on_page_bit(page, PG_writeback);
 	}

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-01-09  2:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-03 14:19 syzbot
2021-01-04 20:41 ` Andrew Morton
2021-01-04 21:52   ` Linus Torvalds
2021-01-05  3:28     ` Hugh Dickins
2021-01-05 19:31       ` Linus Torvalds
2021-01-05 19:53         ` Linus Torvalds
2021-01-05 21:13           ` Hugh Dickins
2021-01-05 21:22             ` Linus Torvalds
2021-01-05 21:34               ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-01-09  2:04           ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-01-12 10:44             ` Jan Kara
2021-01-12 17:35               ` Linus Torvalds

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='CAHk-=wgD9GK5CeHopYmRHoYS9cNuCmDMsc=+MbM_KgJ0KB+=ng@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=syzbot+2fc0712f8f8b8b8fa0ef@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
    --cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.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