lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] zram: remove BD_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO with writeback feature
Hi Sergey,

On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 11:39:29AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (08/02/18 14:13), Andrew Morton wrote:
> [..]
> > That changelog is rather hard to follow. Please review my edits:
> >
> > : If zram supports writeback feature, it's no longer a BD_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO
> ^BDI_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO
>
> [..]
>
> > A reader looking at this would wonder "why the heck are we doing that".
> > Adding a code comment would help them.
>
> The interesting thing here is that include/linux/backing-dev.h
> BDI_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO comment says
>
> "Device is so fast that asynchronous IO would be inefficient."
>
> Which is not the reason why BDI_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO is used by ZRAM.
> Probably, the comment needs to be updated as well.

I couldn't catch your point. Could you clarify a little bit more?
What do you want to correct for the comment?

>
> Both SWP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO and BDI_CAP_SYNCHRONOUS_IO tend to pivot
> "efficiency" [looking at the comments], but in ZRAM's case the whole
> reason to use SYNC IO is a race condition and user-after-free that
> follows.

Actually, it's not whole reason. As I wrote down, without it, swap_readpage
waits the IO completion for a long time by blk_poll so it causes system
sluggish problem when device is slow(e.g., zram with backing device).

Thanks.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-03 05:01    [W:0.065 / U:1.336 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site