Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <f8d924e7-8faf-438d-4d2f-5f806ef88a49@bytedance.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Jun 2023 21:24:25 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 29/29] mm: shrinker: move shrinker-related code into a
 separate file
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
Cc:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@fromorbit.com, tkhai@ya.ru,
        vbabka@suse.cz, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, djwong@kernel.org,
        brauner@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com,
        linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
References: <20230622085335.77010-1-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
 <20230622085335.77010-30-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
 <20230623052554.GA11471@google.com>
From:   Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230623052554.GA11471@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi Sergey,

On 2023/6/23 13:25, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (23/06/22 16:53), Qi Zheng wrote:
>> +/*
>> + * Remove one
>> + */
>> +void unregister_shrinker(struct shrinker *shrinker)
>> +{
>> +	struct dentry *debugfs_entry;
>> +	int debugfs_id;
>> +
>> +	if (!(shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_REGISTERED))
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	shrinker_put(shrinker);
>> +	wait_for_completion(&shrinker->completion_wait);
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&shrinker_mutex);
>> +	list_del_rcu(&shrinker->list);
> 
> Should this function wait for RCU grace period(s) before it goes
> touching shrinker fields?

Why? We will free this shrinker instance by rcu after executing
unregister_shrinker(). So it is safe to touch shrinker fields here.

> 
>> +	shrinker->flags &= ~SHRINKER_REGISTERED;
>> +	if (shrinker->flags & SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE)
>> +		unregister_memcg_shrinker(shrinker);
>> +	debugfs_entry = shrinker_debugfs_detach(shrinker, &debugfs_id);
>> +	mutex_unlock(&shrinker_mutex);
>> +
>> +	shrinker_debugfs_remove(debugfs_entry, debugfs_id);
>> +
>> +	kfree(shrinker->nr_deferred);
>> +	shrinker->nr_deferred = NULL;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_shrinker);
> 
> [..]
> 
>> +void shrinker_free(struct shrinker *shrinker)
>> +{
>> +	kfree(shrinker);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(shrinker_free);
>> +
>> +void unregister_and_free_shrinker(struct shrinker *shrinker)
>> +{
>> +	unregister_shrinker(shrinker);
>> +	kfree_rcu(shrinker, rcu);
>> +}
> 
> Seems like this
> 
> 	unregister_shrinker();
> 	shrinker_free();
> 
> is not exact equivalent of this
> 
> 	unregister_and_free_shrinker();

Yes, my original intention is that shrinker_free() is only used to
handle the case where register_shrinker() returns failure.

I will implement the method suggested by Dave in 02/29. Those APIs are
more concise and will bring more benefits. :)

Thanks,
Qi