Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1706688
| From | Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] zram: remove zram_rw_page |
| Date | 2017-08-08 17:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uceVA-21I-33@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <uc6EG-4gz-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <uc6EH-4gz-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <uc6Om-4zt-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <uc7U5-5eH-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <uc83M-5ix-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 05:23:50PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > Hello Minchan, > > On (08/08/17 17:13), Minchan Kim wrote: > > Hi Sergey, > > > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 04:02:26PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > > On (08/08/17 15:50), Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > With on-stack-bio, rw_page interface doesn't provide a clear performance > > > > benefit for zram and surely has a maintenance burden, so remove the > > > > last user to remove rw_page completely. > > > > > > OK, never really liked it, I think we had that conversation before. > > > > > > as far as I remember, zram_rw_page() was the reason we had to do some > > > tricks with init_lock to make lockdep happy. may be now we can "simplify" > > > the things back. > > > > I cannot remember. Blame my brain. ;-) > > no worries. I didn't remember it clearly as well, hence the "may be" part. > > commit 08eee69fcf6baea543a2b4d2a2fcba0e61aa3160 > Author: Minchan Kim > > zram: remove init_lock in zram_make_request > > Admin could reset zram during I/O operation going on so we have used > zram->init_lock as read-side lock in I/O path to prevent sudden zram > meta freeing. > > However, the init_lock is really troublesome. We can't do call > zram_meta_alloc under init_lock due to lockdep splat because > zram_rw_page is one of the function under reclaim path and hold it as > read_lock while other places in process context hold it as write_lock. > So, we have used allocation out of the lock to avoid lockdep warn but > it's not good for readability and fainally, I met another lockdep splat > between init_lock and cpu_hotplug from kmem_cache_destroy during working > zsmalloc compaction. :( I don't think this patch is going to change anything with respect to the use of init_lock. You're still going to be called in the reclaim path, no longer through rw_page, but through the bio path instead.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v1 0/6] Remove rw_page Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2017-08-08 09:00 +0200
[PATCH v1 5/6] zram: remove zram_rw_page Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2017-08-08 09:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] zram: remove zram_rw_page Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 09:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] zram: remove zram_rw_page Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2017-08-08 10:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] zram: remove zram_rw_page Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2017-08-08 10:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] zram: remove zram_rw_page Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-08-08 17:50 +0200
csiph-web