On (01/13/14 20:19), Minchan Kim wrote:
> [1] introduced free request pending code to avoid scheduling
> by mutex under spinlock and it was a mess which made code
> lenghty and increased overhead.
> 
> Now, we don't need zram->lock any more to free slot so
> this patch reverts it and then, tb_lock should protect it.
> 
> [1] a0c516c, zram: don't grab mutex in zram_slot_free_noity
> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c | 54 
> +++++--------------------------------------
>  drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h | 10 --------
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> index 24e6426..f1a3c95 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
> @@ -522,20 +522,6 @@ out:
>       return ret;
>  }
>  
> -static void handle_pending_slot_free(struct zram *zram)
> -{
> -     struct zram_slot_free *free_rq;
> -
> -     spin_lock(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -     while (zram->slot_free_rq) {
> -             free_rq = zram->slot_free_rq;
> -             zram->slot_free_rq = free_rq->next;
> -             zram_free_page(zram, free_rq->index);
> -             kfree(free_rq);
> -     }
> -     spin_unlock(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -}
> -
>  static int zram_bvec_rw(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec *bvec, u32 index,
>                       int offset, struct bio *bio, int rw)
>  {
> @@ -547,7 +533,6 @@ static int zram_bvec_rw(struct zram *zram, struct bio_vec 
> *bvec, u32 index,
>               up_read(&zram->lock);
>       } else {
>               down_write(&zram->lock);
> -             handle_pending_slot_free(zram);
>               ret = zram_bvec_write(zram, bvec, index, offset);
>               up_write(&zram->lock);
>       }
> @@ -566,8 +551,6 @@ static void zram_reset_device(struct zram *zram, bool 
> reset_capacity)
>               return;
>       }
>  
> -     flush_work(&zram->free_work);
> -
>       meta = zram->meta;
>       zram->init_done = 0;
>  
> @@ -769,40 +752,19 @@ error:
>       bio_io_error(bio);
>  }
>  
> -static void zram_slot_free(struct work_struct *work)
> -{
> -     struct zram *zram;
> -
> -     zram = container_of(work, struct zram, free_work);
> -     down_write(&zram->lock);
> -     handle_pending_slot_free(zram);
> -     up_write(&zram->lock);
> -}
> -
> -static void add_slot_free(struct zram *zram, struct zram_slot_free *free_rq)
> -{
> -     spin_lock(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -     free_rq->next = zram->slot_free_rq;
> -     zram->slot_free_rq = free_rq;
> -     spin_unlock(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -}
> -
>  static void zram_slot_free_notify(struct block_device *bdev,
>                               unsigned long index)
>  {
>       struct zram *zram;
> -     struct zram_slot_free *free_rq;
> +     struct zram_meta *meta;
>  
>       zram = bdev->bd_disk->private_data;
> -     atomic64_inc(&zram->stats.notify_free);
> -
> -     free_rq = kmalloc(sizeof(struct zram_slot_free), GFP_ATOMIC);
> -     if (!free_rq)
> -             return;
> +     meta = zram->meta;
>  
> -     free_rq->index = index;
> -     add_slot_free(zram, free_rq);
> -     schedule_work(&zram->free_work);
> +     write_lock(&meta->tb_lock);
> +     zram_free_page(zram, index);
> +     write_unlock(&meta->tb_lock);
> +     atomic64_inc(&zram->stats.notify_free);
>  }
>  

Hello Minchan,
I think we need to down_write init_lock in zram_slot_free_notify(),
and thus can avoid locking meta->tb_lock. otherwise, I think,
there is a chance that zram_slot_free_notify() can race with
device reset, e.g.
        
        zram_slot_free_notify()                 zram_reset_device()
                                                down_write(&zram->init_lock);
        meta = zram->meta
                                                zram_meta_free(zram->meta);
                                                zram->meta = NULL;
        write_lock(&meta->tb_lock);
        [...]
        write_unlock(&meta->tb_lock);
                                                [..]
                                                up_write(&zram->init_lock);

        -ss

>  static const struct block_device_operations zram_devops = {
> @@ -849,10 +811,6 @@ static int create_device(struct zram *zram, int 
> device_id)
>       init_rwsem(&zram->lock);
>       init_rwsem(&zram->init_lock);
>  
> -     INIT_WORK(&zram->free_work, zram_slot_free);
> -     spin_lock_init(&zram->slot_free_lock);
> -     zram->slot_free_rq = NULL;
> -
>       zram->queue = blk_alloc_queue(GFP_KERNEL);
>       if (!zram->queue) {
>               pr_err("Error allocating disk queue for device %d\n",
> diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h
> index c3f453f..d876300 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.h
> @@ -90,20 +90,11 @@ struct zram_meta {
>       struct zs_pool *mem_pool;
>  };
>  
> -struct zram_slot_free {
> -     unsigned long index;
> -     struct zram_slot_free *next;
> -};
> -
>  struct zram {
>       struct zram_meta *meta;
>       struct rw_semaphore lock; /* protect compression buffers,
>                                  * reads and writes
>                                  */
> -
> -     struct work_struct free_work;  /* handle pending free request */
> -     struct zram_slot_free *slot_free_rq; /* list head of free request */
> -
>       struct request_queue *queue;
>       struct gendisk *disk;
>       int init_done;
> @@ -114,7 +105,6 @@ struct zram {
>        * we can store in a disk.
>        */
>       u64 disksize;   /* bytes */
> -     spinlock_t slot_free_lock;
>  
>       struct zram_stats stats;
>  };
> -- 
> 1.8.4.3
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to