From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] mm/slub: Refactor deactivate_slab()
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 19:16:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cd4144f5-e769-cf73-ca25-b36f2c4bbf35@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220221105336.522086-6-42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
On 2/21/22 11:53, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> Simply deactivate_slab() by removing variable 'lock' and replacing
> 'l' and 'm' with 'mode'. Instead, remove slab from list and unlock
> n->list_lock when cmpxchg_double() fails, and then retry.
>
> One slight functional change is releasing and taking n->list_lock again
> when cmpxchg_double() fails. This is not harmful because SLUB avoids
> deactivating slabs as much as possible.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Hm I wonder if we could simplify even a bit more. Do we have to actually
place the slab on a partial (full) list before the cmpxchg, only to remove
it when cmpxchg fails? Seems it's to avoid anyone else seeing the slab
un-frozen, but not on the list, which would be unexpected. However if anyone
sees such slab, they have to take the list_lock first to start working with
the slab... so this should be safe, because we hold the list_lock here, and
will place the slab on the list before we release it. But it thus shouldn't
matter if the placement happens before or after a successful cmpxchg, no? So
we can only do it once after a successful cmpxchg and need no undo's?
Specifically AFAIK the only possible race should be with a __slab_free()
which might observe !was_frozen after we succeed an unfreezing cmpxchg and
go through the
"} else { /* Needs to be taken off a list */"
branch but then it takes the list_lock as the first thing, so will be able
to proceed only after the slab is actually on the list.
Do I miss anything or would you agree?
> ---
> mm/slub.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index a4964deccb61..2d0663befb9e 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -2350,8 +2350,8 @@ static void deactivate_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
> {
> enum slab_modes { M_NONE, M_PARTIAL, M_FULL, M_FREE };
> struct kmem_cache_node *n = get_node(s, slab_nid(slab));
> - int lock = 0, free_delta = 0;
> - enum slab_modes l = M_NONE, m = M_NONE;
> + int free_delta = 0;
> + enum slab_modes mode = M_NONE;
> void *nextfree, *freelist_iter, *freelist_tail;
> int tail = DEACTIVATE_TO_HEAD;
> unsigned long flags = 0;
> @@ -2420,57 +2420,49 @@ static void deactivate_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
> new.frozen = 0;
>
> if (!new.inuse && n->nr_partial >= s->min_partial)
> - m = M_FREE;
> + mode = M_FREE;
> else if (new.freelist) {
> - m = M_PARTIAL;
> - if (!lock) {
> - lock = 1;
> - /*
> - * Taking the spinlock removes the possibility that
> - * acquire_slab() will see a slab that is frozen
> - */
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&n->list_lock, flags);
> - }
> - } else {
> - m = M_FULL;
> - if (kmem_cache_debug_flags(s, SLAB_STORE_USER) && !lock) {
> - lock = 1;
> - /*
> - * This also ensures that the scanning of full
> - * slabs from diagnostic functions will not see
> - * any frozen slabs.
> - */
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&n->list_lock, flags);
> - }
> + mode = M_PARTIAL;
> + /*
> + * Taking the spinlock removes the possibility that
> + * acquire_slab() will see a slab that is frozen
> + */
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&n->list_lock, flags);
> + add_partial(n, slab, tail);
> + } else if (kmem_cache_debug_flags(s, SLAB_STORE_USER)) {
> + mode = M_FULL;
> + /*
> + * This also ensures that the scanning of full
> + * slabs from diagnostic functions will not see
> + * any frozen slabs.
> + */
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&n->list_lock, flags);
> + add_full(s, n, slab);
> }
>
> - if (l != m) {
> - if (l == M_PARTIAL)
> - remove_partial(n, slab);
> - else if (l == M_FULL)
> - remove_full(s, n, slab);
>
> - if (m == M_PARTIAL)
> - add_partial(n, slab, tail);
> - else if (m == M_FULL)
> - add_full(s, n, slab);
> - }
> -
> - l = m;
> if (!cmpxchg_double_slab(s, slab,
> old.freelist, old.counters,
> new.freelist, new.counters,
> - "unfreezing slab"))
> + "unfreezing slab")) {
> + if (mode == M_PARTIAL) {
> + remove_partial(n, slab);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
> + } else if (mode == M_FULL) {
> + remove_full(s, n, slab);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
> + }
> goto redo;
> + }
>
> - if (lock)
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
>
> - if (m == M_PARTIAL)
> + if (mode == M_PARTIAL) {
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
> stat(s, tail);
> - else if (m == M_FULL)
> + } else if (mode == M_FULL) {
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
> stat(s, DEACTIVATE_FULL);
> - else if (m == M_FREE) {
> + } else if (mode == M_FREE) {
> stat(s, DEACTIVATE_EMPTY);
> discard_slab(s, slab);
> stat(s, FREE_SLAB);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-24 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-21 10:53 [PATCH 0/5] slab cleanups Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-21 10:53 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm/sl[au]b: Unify __ksize() Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-23 18:39 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-02-23 19:06 ` Marco Elver
2022-02-24 12:26 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-02-21 10:53 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm/sl[auo]b: Do not export __ksize() Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-21 15:46 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-02-23 3:26 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-23 18:40 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-02-21 10:53 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm/slab: Do not call kmalloc_large() for unsupported size Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-21 15:53 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-02-22 8:10 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-22 19:59 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-02-23 3:24 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-24 12:48 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-02-24 13:31 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-24 15:08 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-02-21 10:53 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm/slub: Limit min_partial only in cache creation Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-22 23:48 ` David Rientjes
2022-02-23 3:37 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-24 12:52 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-02-21 10:53 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm/slub: Refactor deactivate_slab() Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-24 18:16 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2022-02-25 9:34 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-25 9:50 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-02-25 10:07 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-02-25 10:26 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
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=cd4144f5-e769-cf73-ca25-b36f2c4bbf35@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/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