Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8ABC433EF for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 21:35:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CED261246 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 21:35:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231279AbhKPVi2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:38:28 -0500 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de ([195.135.220.28]:59526 "EHLO smtp-out1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229605AbhKPVi1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:38:27 -0500 Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D388218B5; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 21:35:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1637098529; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=fnpSPGK1pOxtwUMg/iQOy5Bf5dvDM+Ppm671IC1Ri+4=; b=HFxhIJAm4BYWSB52oxER+nilF5GwDZUi1+W+vXmb+WoCbQZ2Qll4Ku+AbVXNg3X2V//t6v mAff4VJlFxRNE2gHpcPolsojeaaT7lkKoY3RrdTgpl7HGpFlFma+cFi/T7uF9xuneRCUKq g/2rxV8LRcnxVg0/vOPvz8MOzZrsczY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1637098529; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=fnpSPGK1pOxtwUMg/iQOy5Bf5dvDM+Ppm671IC1Ri+4=; b=Djt4ObpCCm3nYJD2EM8ryL4za7I91XlYNPLYK2bTE7SRF+EM2U13RNGjosw/0EB9HD5KJm 5E0a+4vLcKpCMgDw== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7675713C62; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 21:35:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id 3qtlDR4klGFbHQAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 16 Nov 2021 21:35:26 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "NeilBrown" To: "Christoph Hellwig" Cc: "Trond Myklebust" , "Anna Schumaker" , "Chuck Lever" , "Andrew Morton" , "Mel Gorman" , linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/13] MM: reclaim mustn't enter FS for swap-over-NFS In-reply-to: References: <163702956672.25805.16457749992977493579.stgit@noble.brown>, <163703064452.25805.16932817889703270242.stgit@noble.brown>, Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 08:35:23 +1100 Message-id: <163709852340.13692.16362531894844686350@noble.neil.brown.name> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 16 Nov 2021, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 01:44:04PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > + /* ->flags can be updated non-atomicially (scan_swap_map_slots), > > + * but that will never affect SWP_FS_OPS, so the data_race > > + * is safe. > > + */ > > may_enter_fs =3D (sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) || > > + (PageSwapCache(page) && > > + !data_race(page_swap_info(page)->flags & SWP_FS_OPS) && > > + (sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_IO)); >=20 > You might want to move the comment and SWP_FS_OPS into a little > inline helper. That makes it a lot more readable and also avoids the > overly long line in the second hunk. Yes, that's a good idea. Something like this.... Thanks, NeilBrown From a85d09cc3d671c45e32d782454afeeaaaece96c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: NeilBrown Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 13:35:56 +1100 Subject: [PATCH] MM: reclaim mustn't enter FS for swap-over-NFS If swap-out is using filesystem operations (SWP_FS_OPS), then it is not safe to enter the FS for reclaim. So only down-grade the requirement for swap pages to __GFP_IO after checking that SWP_FS_OPS are not being used. Signed-off-by: NeilBrown --- mm/vmscan.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c index fb9584641ac7..e672fcc14bac 100644 --- a/mm/vmscan.c +++ b/mm/vmscan.c @@ -1464,6 +1464,21 @@ static unsigned int demote_page_list(struct list_head = *demote_pages, return nr_succeeded; } =20 +static bool test_may_enter_fs(struct page *page, gfp_t gfp_mask) +{ + if (gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) + return true; + if (!PageSwapCache(page) || !(gfp_mask & __GFP_IO)) + return false; + /* We can "enter_fs" for swap-cache with only __GFP_IO + * providing this isn't SWP_FS_OPS. + * ->flags can be updated non-atomicially (scan_swap_map_slots), + * but that will never affect SWP_FS_OPS, so the data_race + * is safe. + */ + return !data_race(page_swap_info(page)->flags & SWP_FS_OPS); +} + /* * shrink_page_list() returns the number of reclaimed pages */ @@ -1513,8 +1528,7 @@ static unsigned int shrink_page_list(struct list_head *= page_list, if (!sc->may_unmap && page_mapped(page)) goto keep_locked; =20 - may_enter_fs =3D (sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) || - (PageSwapCache(page) && (sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_IO)); + may_enter_fs =3D test_may_enter_fs(page, sc->gfp_mask); =20 /* * The number of dirty pages determines if a node is marked @@ -1682,7 +1696,8 @@ static unsigned int shrink_page_list(struct list_head *= page_list, goto activate_locked_split; } =20 - may_enter_fs =3D true; + may_enter_fs =3D test_may_enter_fs(page, + sc->gfp_mask); =20 /* Adding to swap updated mapping */ mapping =3D page_mapping(page); --=20 2.33.1