From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BB8DC433B4 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 03:44:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8C061132 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 03:44:41 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DA8C061132 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 4D62E6B0072; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:44:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 486496B0073; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:44:41 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 300906B0074; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:44:41 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0081.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.81]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 106EF6B0072 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:44:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin09.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B153B180255A4 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 03:44:40 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78029580720.09.100BC54 Received: from mail-il1-f169.google.com (mail-il1-f169.google.com [209.85.166.169]) by imf25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07F026000113 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 03:44:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-il1-f169.google.com with SMTP id 6so15924000ilt.9 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:44:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Xfdm6SLikmekIdGUXOcQbfA+pIeWoCcb6+txvE9srgk=; b=HfpRTLO/71BHEbMF97Io+ZAQqupu5OjMNkUC6xasTBEYJ5G7UkmZfsrcYPdl9+OV2L Gx6x8R5E4eoagR/9Xzh5tRz+aCQDuBSPFqrZJCFeD0TWB8TV1hsHawiRnubPCLEMvdQS TxzHYicRwwsO5TAbY+2YWWYngpcxaT/iF7S+mwq8ZqHPeE7iEJ2S4yqEpqYIOkgrVPEK RyV1g0gFg+EtOos9Sdtwx8eGdOeBiPDLhghxnphltcWDSeUnyplS/3JUs50TwABuIbXA kv7bCTUEdckdZn6jDvbhSOo2j29jpH5XDR18JcRo9PCom/3/lEUFM197yL0dy4CxUHze 7HPw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530jAAfH1Ddeu13qP4/aLhot5ttdIJ4Y42yppEitXXqE4kCaQF/X Q8Xo4gsbXLhrazAOZZac924= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxbx/s/NB+3pabeJ+q80RhKB1UHz5lvice0vYUHqlo6Ve8Rdq10JnZ4/30S11a2Wgu473FPBA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:190a:: with SMTP id w10mr4095472ilu.1.1618371879644; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (243.199.238.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.238.199.243]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j2sm7462310ilr.76.2021.04.13.20.44.39 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 03:44:37 +0000 From: Dennis Zhou To: "Huang, Ying" Cc: Miaohe Lin , akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@suse.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, vbabka@suse.cz, alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com, willy@infradead.org, minchan@kernel.org, richard.weiyang@gmail.com, hughd@google.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/swapfile: add percpu_ref support for swap Message-ID: References: <20210408130820.48233-1-linmiaohe@huawei.com> <20210408130820.48233-2-linmiaohe@huawei.com> <87fszww55d.fsf@yhuang6-desk1.ccr.corp.intel.com> <87zgy4ufr3.fsf@yhuang6-desk1.ccr.corp.intel.com> <46a51c49-2887-0c1a-bcf3-e1ebe9698ebf@huawei.com> <874kg9u0jo.fsf@yhuang6-desk1.ccr.corp.intel.com> <75e27441-7744-7a10-e709-c8cd00830099@huawei.com> <87tuo9sjpj.fsf@yhuang6-desk1.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87tuo9sjpj.fsf@yhuang6-desk1.ccr.corp.intel.com> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 07F026000113 X-Stat-Signature: c3rrm3kjopkgdat1sfo7cyu95szjxiti X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 Received-SPF: none (gmail.com>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf25; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=mail-il1-f169.google.com; client-ip=209.85.166.169 X-HE-DKIM-Result: none/none X-HE-Tag: 1618371877-675103 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: Hello, On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:06:48AM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote: > Miaohe Lin writes: > > > On 2021/4/14 9:17, Huang, Ying wrote: > >> Miaohe Lin writes: > >> > >>> On 2021/4/12 15:24, Huang, Ying wrote: > >>>> "Huang, Ying" writes: > >>>> > >>>>> Miaohe Lin writes: > >>>>> > >>>>>> We will use percpu-refcount to serialize against concurrent swapoff. This > >>>>>> patch adds the percpu_ref support for later fixup. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> include/linux/swap.h | 2 ++ > >>>>>> mm/swapfile.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++--- > >>>>>> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/swap.h b/include/linux/swap.h > >>>>>> index 144727041e78..849ba5265c11 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/include/linux/swap.h > >>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/swap.h > >>>>>> @@ -240,6 +240,7 @@ struct swap_cluster_list { > >>>>>> * The in-memory structure used to track swap areas. > >>>>>> */ > >>>>>> struct swap_info_struct { > >>>>>> + struct percpu_ref users; /* serialization against concurrent swapoff */ > >>>>>> unsigned long flags; /* SWP_USED etc: see above */ > >>>>>> signed short prio; /* swap priority of this type */ > >>>>>> struct plist_node list; /* entry in swap_active_head */ > >>>>>> @@ -260,6 +261,7 @@ struct swap_info_struct { > >>>>>> struct block_device *bdev; /* swap device or bdev of swap file */ > >>>>>> struct file *swap_file; /* seldom referenced */ > >>>>>> unsigned int old_block_size; /* seldom referenced */ > >>>>>> + struct completion comp; /* seldom referenced */ > >>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_FRONTSWAP > >>>>>> unsigned long *frontswap_map; /* frontswap in-use, one bit per page */ > >>>>>> atomic_t frontswap_pages; /* frontswap pages in-use counter */ > >>>>>> diff --git a/mm/swapfile.c b/mm/swapfile.c > >>>>>> index 149e77454e3c..724173cd7d0c 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/mm/swapfile.c > >>>>>> +++ b/mm/swapfile.c > >>>>>> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ > >>>>>> #include > >>>>>> #include > >>>>>> #include > >>>>>> +#include > >>>>>> > >>>>>> #include > >>>>>> #include > >>>>>> @@ -511,6 +512,15 @@ static void swap_discard_work(struct work_struct *work) > >>>>>> spin_unlock(&si->lock); > >>>>>> } > >>>>>> > >>>>>> +static void swap_users_ref_free(struct percpu_ref *ref) > >>>>>> +{ > >>>>>> + struct swap_info_struct *si; > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> + si = container_of(ref, struct swap_info_struct, users); > >>>>>> + complete(&si->comp); > >>>>>> + percpu_ref_exit(&si->users); > >>>>> > >>>>> Because percpu_ref_exit() is used, we cannot use percpu_ref_tryget() in > >>>>> get_swap_device(), better to add comments there. > >>>> > >>>> I just noticed that the comments of percpu_ref_tryget_live() says, > >>>> > >>>> * This function is safe to call as long as @ref is between init and exit. > >>>> > >>>> While we need to call get_swap_device() almost at any time, so it's > >>>> better to avoid to call percpu_ref_exit() at all. This will waste some > >>>> memory, but we need to follow the API definition to avoid potential > >>>> issues in the long term. > >>> > >>> I have to admit that I'am not really familiar with percpu_ref. So I read the > >>> implementation code of the percpu_ref and found percpu_ref_tryget_live() could > >>> be called after exit now. But you're right we need to follow the API definition > >>> to avoid potential issues in the long term. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> And we need to call percpu_ref_init() before insert the swap_info_struct > >>>> into the swap_info[]. > >>> > >>> If we remove the call to percpu_ref_exit(), we should not use percpu_ref_init() > >>> here because *percpu_ref->data is assumed to be NULL* in percpu_ref_init() while > >>> this is not the case as we do not call percpu_ref_exit(). Maybe percpu_ref_reinit() > >>> or percpu_ref_resurrect() will do the work. > >>> > >>> One more thing, how could I distinguish the killed percpu_ref from newly allocated one? > >>> It seems percpu_ref_is_dying is only safe to call when @ref is between init and exit. > >>> Maybe I could do this in alloc_swap_info()? > >> > >> Yes. In alloc_swap_info(), you can distinguish newly allocated and > >> reused swap_info_struct. > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> +} > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> static void alloc_cluster(struct swap_info_struct *si, unsigned long idx) > >>>>>> { > >>>>>> struct swap_cluster_info *ci = si->cluster_info; > >>>>>> @@ -2500,7 +2510,7 @@ static void enable_swap_info(struct swap_info_struct *p, int prio, > >>>>>> * Guarantee swap_map, cluster_info, etc. fields are valid > >>>>>> * between get/put_swap_device() if SWP_VALID bit is set > >>>>>> */ > >>>>>> - synchronize_rcu(); > >>>>>> + percpu_ref_reinit(&p->users); > >>>>> > >>>>> Although the effect is same, I think it's better to use > >>>>> percpu_ref_resurrect() here to improve code readability. > >>>> > >>>> Check the original commit description for commit eb085574a752 "mm, swap: > >>>> fix race between swapoff and some swap operations" and discussion email > >>>> thread as follows again, > >>>> > >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20171219053650.GB7829@linux.vnet.ibm.com/ > >>>> > >>>> I found that the synchronize_rcu() here is to avoid to call smp_rmb() or > >>>> smp_load_acquire() in get_swap_device(). Now we will use > >>>> percpu_ref_tryget_live() in get_swap_device(), so we will need to add > >>>> the necessary memory barrier, or make sure percpu_ref_tryget_live() has > >>>> ACQUIRE semantics. Per my understanding, we need to change > >>>> percpu_ref_tryget_live() for that. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Do you mean the below scene is possible? > >>> > >>> cpu1 > >>> swapon() > >>> ... > >>> percpu_ref_init > >>> ... > >>> setup_swap_info > >>> /* smp_store_release() is inside percpu_ref_reinit */ > >>> percpu_ref_reinit > >> > >> spin_unlock() has RELEASE semantics already. > >> > >>> ... > >>> > >>> cpu2 > >>> get_swap_device() > >>> /* ignored smp_rmb() */ > >>> percpu_ref_tryget_live > >> > >> Some kind of ACQUIRE is required here to guarantee the refcount is > >> checked before fetching the other fields of swap_info_struct. I have > >> sent out a RFC patch to mailing list to discuss this. I'm just catching up and following along a little bit. I apologize I haven't read the swap code, but my understanding is you are trying to narrow a race condition with swapoff. That makes sense to me. I'm not sure I follow the need to race with reinitializing the ref though? Is it not possible to wait out the dying swap info and then create a new one rather than push acquire semantics? > > > > Many thanks. > > But We may still need to add a smp_rmb() in get_swap_device() in case > > we can't add ACQUIRE for refcount. > > Yes. > > Best Regards, > Huang, Ying > Thanks, Dennis