Re: [RFC PATCH -v3] take all anon_vma locks in anon_vma_lock

[Rik van Riel]

On 04/28/2010 08:28 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 5:57 AM, Rik van Riel<riel@xxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
> > Take all the locks for all the anon_vmas in anon_vma_lock, this properly
> > excludes migration and the transparent hugepage code from VMA changes done
> > by mmap/munmap/mprotect/expand_stack/etc...
> >
> > Unfortunately, this requires adding a new lock (mm->anon_vma_chain_lock),
> > otherwise we have an unavoidable lock ordering conflict.  This changes the
> > locking rules for the "same_vma" list to be either mm->mmap_sem for write,
> > or mm->mmap_sem for read plus the new mm->anon_vma_chain lock.  This limits
> > the place where the new lock is taken to 2 locations - anon_vma_prepare and
> > expand_downwards.
> >
> > Document the locking rules for the same_vma list in the anon_vma_chain and
> > remove the anon_vma_lock call from expand_upwards, which does not need it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel<riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> This patch makes things simple. So I like this.
> Actually, I wanted this all-at-once locks approach.
> But I was worried about that how the patch affects AIM 7 workload
> which is cause of anon_vma_chain about scalability by Rik.
> But now Rik himself is sending the patch. So I assume the patch
> couldn't decrease scalability of the workload heavily.

The thing is, the number of anon_vmas attached to a VMA is
small (depth of the tree, so for apache or aim the typical
depth is 2). This N is between 1 and 3.

The problem we had originally is the _width_ of the tree,
where every sibling process was attached to the same anon_vma
and the rmap code had to walk the page tables of all the
processes, for every privately owned page in each child process.
For large server workloads, this N is between a few hundred and
a few thousand.

What matters most at this point is correctness - we need to be
able to exclude rmap walks when messing with a VMA in any way
that breaks lookups, because rmap walks for page migration and
hugepage conversion have to be 100% reliable.

That is not a constraint I had in mind with the original
anon_vma changes, so the code needs to be fixed up now...

I suspect that taking one or two extra spinlocks in the code
paths changed by this patch (mmap/munmap/...) is going to make
a difference at all, since all of those paths are pretty
infrequently taken.

--
All rights reversed
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/