On Tue, 22 Dec 2020, 03:11 Song Bao Hua (Barry Song), <song.bao....@hisilicon.com> wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) > > Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 3:03 PM > > To: 'Vitaly Wool' <vitaly.w...@konsulko.com> > > Cc: Shakeel Butt <shake...@google.com>; Minchan Kim <minc...@kernel.org>; > > Mike > > Galbraith <efa...@gmx.de>; LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; linux-mm > > <linux...@kvack.org>; Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bige...@linutronix.de>; > > NitinGupta <ngu...@vflare.org>; Sergey Senozhatsky > > <sergey.senozhatsky.w...@gmail.com>; Andrew Morton > > <a...@linux-foundation.org>; tiantao (H) <tiant...@hisilicon.com> > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] zsmalloc: do not use bit_spin_lock > > > > > > > I'm still not convinced. Will kmap what, src? At this point src might > > > become > > just a bogus pointer. > > > > As long as the memory is still there, we can kmap it by its page struct. But > > if > > it is not there anymore, we have no way. > > > > > Why couldn't the object have been moved somewhere else (due to the > > > compaction > > mechanism for instance) > > > at the time DMA kicks in? > > > > So zs_map_object() will guarantee the src won't be moved by holding those > > preemption-disabled lock? > > If so, it seems we have to drop the MOVABLE gfp in zswap for zsmalloc case? > > > > Or we can do get_page() to avoid the movement of the page.
I would like to discuss this more in zswap context than zsmalloc's. Since zsmalloc does not implement reclaim callback, using it in zswap is a corner case anyway. zswap, on the other hand, may be dealing with some new backends in future which have more chances to become mainstream. Imagine typical NUMA-like cases, i. e. a zswap pool allocated in some kind SRAM, or in unused video memory. In such a case if you try to use a pointer to an invalidated zpool mapping, you are on the way to thrash the system. So: no assumptions that the zswap pool is in regular linear RAM should be made. ~Vitaly > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~Vitaly > > > > > > > Thanks > > Barry > >
