Re: [patch 3/3 v2]swap: add per-partition lock for swapfile

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 10:30:28 +0800
Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> swap_lock is heavily contended when I test swap to 3 fast SSD (even slightly
> slower than swap to 2 such SSD). The main contention comes from
> swap_info_get(). This patch tries to fix the gap with adding a new
> per-partition lock.
> 
> global data like nr_swapfiles, total_swap_pages, least_priority and swap_list are
> still protected by swap_lock.
> 
> nr_swap_pages is an atomic now, it can be changed without swap_lock. In theory,
> it's possible get_swap_page() finds no swap pages but actually there are free
> swap pages. But sounds not a big problem.
> 
> accessing partition specific data (like scan_swap_map and so on) is only
> protected by swap_info_struct.lock.
> 
> Changing swap_info_struct.flags need hold swap_lock and swap_info_struct.lock,
> because scan_scan_map() will check it. read the flags is ok with either the
> locks hold.
> 
> If both swap_lock and swap_info_struct.lock must be hold, we always hold the
> former first to avoid deadlock.
> 
> swap_entry_free() can change swap_list. To delete that code, we add a new
> highest_priority_index. Whenever get_swap_page() is called, we check it. If
> it's valid, we use it.
> 
> It's a pitty get_swap_page() still holds swap_lock(). But in practice,
> swap_lock() isn't heavily contended in my test with this patch (or I can say
> there are other much more heavier bottlenecks like TLB flush). And BTW, looks
> get_swap_page() doesn't really need the lock. We never free swap_info[] and we
> check SWAP_WRITEOK flag. The only risk without the lock is we could swapout to
> some low priority swap, but we can quickly recover after several rounds of
> swap, so sounds not a big deal to me. But I'd prefer to fix this if it's a real

I had to move a few things around due to changes in
drivers/staging/zcache/.

Do you have any performance testing results for this patch?

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]