From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
iommu <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma-debug: fix debug_dma_assert_idle(), use rcu_read_lock()
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 12:02:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whYLHtbeF6BFmoiik9PTjP2+pnpWxXLE9f0ccnT0LAd5A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.2008122005240.11996@eggly.anvils>
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 8:17 PM Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> wrote:
>
> Since commit 2a9127fcf229 ("mm: rewrite wait_on_page_bit_common() logic")
> improved unlock_page(), it has become more noticeable how cow_user_page()
> in a kernel with CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG=y can create and suffer from heavy
> contention on DMA debug's radix_lock in debug_dma_assert_idle().
Ooh.
Yeah, that's ridiculously expensive, and serializes things for no good reason.
Your patch looks obviously correct to me (Christoph?), but it also
makes me go "why are we doing this in the first place"?
Because it looks to me like
(a) the debug check is wrong
(b) this is left-over from early debugging
In particular, I don't see why we couldn't do a COW on a page that is
under writeback at the same time. We're not changing the page that is
doing DMA.
In fact, the whole "COW with DMA" makes me feel like the real bug may
have been due that whole "ambiguous COW" thing, which was fixed in
17839856fd58 ("gup: document and work around "COW can break either
way" issue")
That debug thing goes back almost 7 years, and I don't think it has
caught anything in those seven years, but I could be wrong.
The commit that adds it does talk about a bug, but that code was
removed entirely eventually. And google shows no hits for
debug_dma_assert_idle() since - until your email.
So my gut feel is that we should remove the check entirely, although
your patch does seem like a big improvement.
Christoph?
(And Dan too, of course, in case he happens to be relaxing in front of
the computer away from a newborn baby ;)
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-13 19:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-13 3:17 [PATCH] dma-debug: fix debug_dma_assert_idle(), use rcu_read_lock() Hugh Dickins
2020-08-13 19:02 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2020-08-13 23:37 ` Dan Williams
2020-08-14 5:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-14 22:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-08-15 0:26 ` Hugh Dickins
2020-08-15 0:59 ` 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-=whYLHtbeF6BFmoiik9PTjP2+pnpWxXLE9f0ccnT0LAd5A@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.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).