On (23/02/23 15:46), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > spin_lock(&pool->lock);
> > - while ((src_zspage = isolate_src_zspage(class))) {
> > - /* protect someone accessing the zspage(i.e., zs_map_object) */
> > - migrate_write_lock(src_zspage);
> > -
> > - if (!zs_can_compact(class))
> > - break;
> > -
> > - cc.obj_idx = 0;
> > - cc.s_page = get_first_page(src_zspage);
> > -
> > - while ((dst_zspage = isolate_dst_zspage(class))) {
> > - migrate_write_lock_nested(dst_zspage);
> > -
> > + while (1) {
>
> Hmm, I preferred the old loop structure. Did you see any problem
> to keep old code structure?
Unfortunately we cannot keep the current structure as it will create
conflicting/reverse locking patterns.
What we currently have is that source page is isolated first and its
migration lock is the outter lock:
migrate_write_lock src
Destination page is isolated second and its migration lock is nested:
migrate_write_lock_nested dst
Since destination page lock is nested we always need to unlock it before
we unlock the outer lock (source page migrate lock). If we keep destination
locked (nested lock, which will be a bug) then on the next iteration we will
isolate a new source page and try to migrate_write_lock it except that now
source page migration lock is in fact nested which we take under another
nested lock (which is another bug).
Hence we need to flip the structure: we isolate destination page, its
lock is outter lock, we keep it locked as long as we need and source page
lock becomes nested. I think that's the simplest way.
