From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/13] mm: Optimize page_lock_anon_vma
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 10:35:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1270802129.20295.3269.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100408221817.GE2520@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 15:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 09:17:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Optimize page_lock_anon_vma() by removing the atomic ref count
> > ops from the fast path.
> >
> > Rather complicates the code a lot, but might be worth it.
>
> Some questions and a disclaimer below.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> > ---
> > mm/rmap.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: linux-2.6/mm/rmap.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.orig/mm/rmap.c
> > +++ linux-2.6/mm/rmap.c
> > @@ -78,6 +78,12 @@ static inline struct anon_vma *anon_vma_
> > void anon_vma_free(struct anon_vma *anon_vma)
> > {
> > VM_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&anon_vma->ref));
> > + /*
> > + * Sync against the anon_vma->lock, so that we can hold the
> > + * lock without requiring a reference. See page_lock_anon_vma().
> > + */
> > + mutex_lock(&anon_vma->lock);
>
> On some systems, the CPU is permitted to pull references into the critical
> section from either side. So, do we also need an smp_mb() here?
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&anon_vma->lock);
>
> So, a question...
>
> Can the above mutex be contended? If yes, what happens when the
> competing mutex_lock() acquires the lock at this point? Or, worse yet,
> after the kmem_cache_free()?
>
> If no, what do we accomplish by acquiring the lock?
The thing we gain is that when the holder of the lock finds a !0
refcount it knows it can't go away because any free will first wait to
acquire the lock.
> If the above mutex can be contended, can we fix by substituting
> synchronize_rcu_expedited()? Which will soon require some scalability
> attention if it gets used here, but what else is new? ;-)
No, synchronize_rcu_expedited() will not work here, there is no RCU read
side that covers the full usage of the anon_vma (there can't be, it
needs to sleep).
> > kmem_cache_free(anon_vma_cachep, anon_vma);
> > }
> >
> > @@ -291,7 +297,7 @@ void __init anon_vma_init(void)
> >
> > /*
> > * Getting a lock on a stable anon_vma from a page off the LRU is
> > - * tricky: page_lock_anon_vma relies on RCU to guard against the races.
> > + * tricky: anon_vma_get relies on RCU to guard against the races.
> > */
> > struct anon_vma *anon_vma_get(struct page *page)
> > {
> > @@ -320,12 +326,70 @@ out:
> > return anon_vma;
> > }
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Similar to anon_vma_get(), however it relies on the anon_vma->lock
> > + * to pin the object. However since we cannot wait for the mutex
> > + * acquisition inside the RCU read lock, we use the ref count
> > + * in the slow path.
> > + */
> > struct anon_vma *page_lock_anon_vma(struct page *page)
> > {
> > - struct anon_vma *anon_vma = anon_vma_get(page);
> > + struct anon_vma *anon_vma = NULL;
> > + unsigned long anon_mapping;
> > +
> > +again:
> > + rcu_read_lock();
>
> This is interesting. You have an RCU read-side critical section with
> no rcu_dereference().
>
> This strange state of affairs is actually legal (assuming that
> anon_mapping is the RCU-protected structure) because all dereferences
> of the anon_vma variable are atomic operations that guarantee ordering
> (the mutex_trylock() and the atomic_inc_not_zero().
>
> The other dereferences (the atomic_read()s) are under the lock, so
> are also OK assuming that the lock is held when initializing and
> updating these fields, and even more OK due to the smp_rmb() below.
>
> But see below.
Right so the only thing rcu_read_lock() does here is create the
guarantee that anon_vma is safe to dereference (it lives on a
SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU slab).
But yes, I suppose that page->mapping read that now uses ACCESS_ONCE()
would actually want to be an rcu_dereference(), since that both provides
the ACCESS_ONCE() as the read-depend barrier that I thing would be
needed.
> > + anon_mapping = (unsigned long) ACCESS_ONCE(page->mapping);
> > + if ((anon_mapping & PAGE_MAPPING_FLAGS) != PAGE_MAPPING_ANON)
> > + goto unlock;
> > + if (!page_mapped(page))
> > + goto unlock;
> > +
> > + anon_vma = (struct anon_vma *) (anon_mapping - PAGE_MAPPING_ANON);
> > + if (!mutex_trylock(&anon_vma->lock)) {
> > + /*
> > + * We failed to acquire the lock, take a ref so we can
> > + * drop the RCU read lock and sleep on it.
> > + */
> > + if (!atomic_inc_not_zero(&anon_vma->ref)) {
> > + /*
> > + * Failed to get a ref, we're dead, bail.
> > + */
> > + anon_vma = NULL;
> > + goto unlock;
> > + }
> > + rcu_read_unlock();
> >
> > - if (anon_vma)
> > mutex_lock(&anon_vma->lock);
> > + /*
> > + * We got the lock, drop the temp. ref, if it was the last
> > + * one free it and bail.
> > + */
> > + if (atomic_dec_and_test(&anon_vma->ref)) {
> > + mutex_unlock(&anon_vma->lock);
> > + anon_vma_free(anon_vma);
> > + anon_vma = NULL;
> > + }
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + /*
> > + * Got the lock, check we're still alive. Seeing a ref
> > + * here guarantees the object will stay alive due to
> > + * anon_vma_free() syncing against the lock we now hold.
> > + */
> > + smp_rmb(); /* Order against anon_vma_put() */
>
> This is ordering the fetch into anon_vma against the atomic_read() below?
> If so, smp_read_barrier_depends() will cover it more cheaply. Alternatively,
> use rcu_dereference() when fetching into anon_vma.
>
> Or am I misunderstanding the purpose of this barrier?
Yes, it is:
atomic_dec_and_test(&anon_vma->ref) /* implies mb */
smp_rmb();
atomic_read(&anon_vma->ref);
> (Disclaimer: I have not yet found anon_vma_put(), so I am assuming that
> anon_vma_free() plays the role of a grace period.)
Yes, that lives in one of the other patches (does not exist in
mainline).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-09 8:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 96+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-08 19:17 [PATCH 00/13] mm: preemptibility -v2 Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 01/13] powerpc: Add rcu_read_lock() to gup_fast() implementation Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 20:31 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-09 3:11 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-13 1:05 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-04-13 3:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-14 13:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-15 14:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-16 6:54 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-04-16 13:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-16 23:25 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-04-16 13:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-16 14:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-16 14:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-16 14:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-16 14:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-16 15:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-16 15:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-16 16:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-16 19:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-16 20:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-18 3:06 ` James Bottomley
2010-04-18 13:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-18 18:55 ` James Bottomley
2010-04-16 6:51 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-04-16 8:18 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-16 8:29 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-04-16 9:22 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 02/13] mm: Revalidate anon_vma in page_lock_anon_vma() Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 20:50 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-08 21:20 ` Andrew Morton
2010-04-08 21:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 2:19 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-09 2:19 ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-09 3:16 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-09 4:56 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-09 6:34 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-09 6:47 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-09 7:29 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-09 7:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-09 8:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-09 8:24 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-09 8:01 ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-09 8:17 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-09 14:41 ` mlock and pageout race? Minchan Kim
2010-04-09 8:44 ` [PATCH 02/13] mm: Revalidate anon_vma in page_lock_anon_vma() Peter Zijlstra
2010-05-24 19:32 ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-25 9:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 12:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 03/13] x86: Remove last traces of quicklist usage Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 20:51 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 04/13] mm: Move anon_vma ref out from under CONFIG_KSM Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 12:35 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 05/13] mm: Make use of the anon_vma ref count Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 7:04 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2010-04-09 9:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 06/13] mm: Preemptible mmu_gather Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 3:25 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-09 8:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 20:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-19 19:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 07/13] powerpc: " Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 4:07 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-09 8:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 8:46 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-09 9:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-13 2:06 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-04-13 1:56 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-04-13 1:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-04-13 10:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-14 13:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-14 13:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 08/13] sparc: " Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 09/13] mm, powerpc: Move the RCU page-table freeing into generic code Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 3:35 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-09 8:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 10/13] lockdep, mutex: Provide mutex_lock_nest_lock Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 15:36 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 11/13] mutex: Provide mutex_is_contended Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 15:37 ` Rik van Riel
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 12/13] mm: Convert i_mmap_lock and anon_vma->lock to mutexes Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 19:17 ` [PATCH 13/13] mm: Optimize page_lock_anon_vma Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-08 22:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-09 8:35 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2010-04-09 19:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-04-08 20:29 ` [PATCH 00/13] mm: preemptibility -v2 David Miller
2010-04-08 20:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 1:00 ` David Miller
2010-04-09 4:14 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-09 8:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 8:50 ` Nick Piggin
2010-04-09 8:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 8:58 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2010-04-09 9:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-09 9:03 ` David Howells
2010-04-09 9:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=1270802129.20295.3269.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).