All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
	Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 20:19:17 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1454444369-2146-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> (raw)

Hi,
the following patchset implements a killable variant of write lock for
rw_semaphore. My usecase is to turn as many mmap_sem write users to use
a killable variant which will be helpful for the oom_reaper [1] to
asynchronously tear down the oom victim address space which requires
mmap_sem for read. This will reduce a likelihood of OOM livelocks caused
by oom victim being stuck on a lock or other resource which prevents it
to reach its exit path and release the memory. I haven't implemented
the killable variant of the read lock because I do not have any usecase
for this API.

The patchset is organized as follows.
- Patch 1 is a trivial cleanup
- Patch 2, I belive, shouldn't introduce any functional changes as per
  Documentation/memory-barriers.txt.
- Patch 3 is the preparatory work and necessary infrastructure for
  down_write_killable. It implements generic __down_write_killable
  and prepares the write lock slow path to bail out earlier when told so
- Patch 4-9 are implementing arch specific __down_write_killable. One
  patch per architecture. I haven't even tried to compile test anything but
  sparch which uses CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK in allnoconfig.
  Those shold be mostly trivial.
- One exception is x86 which replaces the current implementation of
  __down_write with the generic one to make easier to read and get rid
  of one level of indirection to the slow path. More on that in patch 10.
  I do not have any problems to drop patch 10 and rework 11 to the current
  inline asm but I think the easier code would be better.
- finally patch 11 implements down_write_killable and ties everything
  together. I am not really an expert on lockdep so I hope I got it right.

Many of arch specific patches are basically same and I can squash them
into one patch if this is preferred but I thought that one patch per
arch is preferable.

My patch to change mmap_sem write users to killable form is not part
of the series because it is not finished yet but I guess it is not
really necessary for the RFC. The API is used in the same way as
mutex_lock_killable.

I have tested on x86 with OOM situations with high mmap_sem contention
(basically many parallel page faults racing with many parallel mmap/munmap
tight loops) so the waiters for the write locks are routinely interrupted
by SIGKILL.

Patches should apply cleanly on both Linus and next tree.

Any feedback is highly appreciated.
---
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1452094975-551-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
	Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore
Date: Tue,  2 Feb 2016 21:19:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1454444369-2146-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> (raw)

Hi,
the following patchset implements a killable variant of write lock for
rw_semaphore. My usecase is to turn as many mmap_sem write users to use
a killable variant which will be helpful for the oom_reaper [1] to
asynchronously tear down the oom victim address space which requires
mmap_sem for read. This will reduce a likelihood of OOM livelocks caused
by oom victim being stuck on a lock or other resource which prevents it
to reach its exit path and release the memory. I haven't implemented
the killable variant of the read lock because I do not have any usecase
for this API.

The patchset is organized as follows.
- Patch 1 is a trivial cleanup
- Patch 2, I belive, shouldn't introduce any functional changes as per
  Documentation/memory-barriers.txt.
- Patch 3 is the preparatory work and necessary infrastructure for
  down_write_killable. It implements generic __down_write_killable
  and prepares the write lock slow path to bail out earlier when told so
- Patch 4-9 are implementing arch specific __down_write_killable. One
  patch per architecture. I haven't even tried to compile test anything but
  sparch which uses CONFIG_RWSEM_GENERIC_SPINLOCK in allnoconfig.
  Those shold be mostly trivial.
- One exception is x86 which replaces the current implementation of
  __down_write with the generic one to make easier to read and get rid
  of one level of indirection to the slow path. More on that in patch 10.
  I do not have any problems to drop patch 10 and rework 11 to the current
  inline asm but I think the easier code would be better.
- finally patch 11 implements down_write_killable and ties everything
  together. I am not really an expert on lockdep so I hope I got it right.

Many of arch specific patches are basically same and I can squash them
into one patch if this is preferred but I thought that one patch per
arch is preferable.

My patch to change mmap_sem write users to killable form is not part
of the series because it is not finished yet but I guess it is not
really necessary for the RFC. The API is used in the same way as
mutex_lock_killable.

I have tested on x86 with OOM situations with high mmap_sem contention
(basically many parallel page faults racing with many parallel mmap/munmap
tight loops) so the waiters for the write locks are routinely interrupted
by SIGKILL.

Patches should apply cleanly on both Linus and next tree.

Any feedback is highly appreciated.
---
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1452094975-551-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org

             reply	other threads:[~2016-02-02 20:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-02 20:19 Michal Hocko [this message]
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 01/12] locking, rwsem: get rid of __down_write_nested Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 02/12] locking, rwsem: drop explicit memory barriers Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 03/12] locking, rwsem: introduce basis for down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 04/12] alpha, rwsem: provide __down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 05/12] ia64, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 06/12] s390, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 07/12] sh, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 11:19   ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-02-03 11:19     ` Sergei Shtylyov
2016-02-03 12:11     ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 12:11       ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 08/12] sparc, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 09/12] xtensa, " Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 10/12] x86, rwsem: simplify __down_write Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03  8:10   ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-03  8:10     ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-03 12:10     ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-03 12:10       ` Michal Hocko
2016-06-03 16:13     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-03 16:13       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-03 22:34       ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-03 22:34         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-09 14:40       ` David Howells
2016-06-09 14:40         ` David Howells
2016-06-09 17:36         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-09 17:36           ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-10 16:39           ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-06-10 16:39             ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 11/12] x86, rwsem: provide __down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41   ` [RFC 11/12 v1] " Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41     ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41     ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-17 16:41     ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19 ` [RFC 12/12] locking, rwsem: provide down_write_killable Michal Hocko
2016-02-02 20:19   ` Michal Hocko
2016-02-19 12:15 ` [RFC 0/12] introduce down_write_killable for rw_semaphore Michal Hocko
2016-02-19 12:15   ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 12:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 12:18   ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 12:56   ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 12:56     ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 13:17     ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 13:17       ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 13:28       ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 13:28         ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 13:43         ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 13:43           ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-09 14:41           ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-09 14:41             ` Michal Hocko
2016-03-10 10:24             ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-10 10:24               ` Ingo Molnar

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=1454444369-2146-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris@zankel.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.