From: Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>
To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@suse.de>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, osandov@fb.com, ming.lei@redhat.com,
kbusch@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, zhouchengming@bytedance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] sbitmap: fix hint wrap in the failure case
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 11:51:24 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2488062c-6338-824e-8cbe-fe1bc3add18e@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r0p24d2l.fsf@suse.de>
On 2023/7/21 03:06, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> chengming.zhou@linux.dev writes:
>
>> From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
>>
>> ```
>> hint = nr + 1;
>> if (hint >= depth - 1)
>> hint = 0;
>> ```
>>
>> Now we wrap the hint to 0 in the failure case, but:
>> 1. hint == depth - 1, is actually an available offset hint, which
>> we shouldn't wrap hint to 0.
>> 2. In the strict round_robin non-wrap case, we shouldn't wrap at all.
>>
>> ```
>> wrap = wrap && hint;
>> ```
>>
>> We only need to check wrap based on the original hint ( > 0), don't need
>> to recheck the new hint which maybe updated in the failure case.
>> Also delete the mismatched comments by the way.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
>> ---
>> lib/sbitmap.c | 16 ++++++++--------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/sbitmap.c b/lib/sbitmap.c
>> index eff4e42c425a..5ed6c2adf58e 100644
>> --- a/lib/sbitmap.c
>> +++ b/lib/sbitmap.c
>> @@ -144,12 +144,7 @@ static int __sbitmap_get_word(unsigned long *word, unsigned long depth,
>> while (1) {
>> nr = find_next_zero_bit(word, depth, hint);
>> if (unlikely(nr >= depth)) {
>> - /*
>> - * We started with an offset, and we didn't reset the
>> - * offset to 0 in a failure case, so start from 0 to
>> - * exhaust the map.
>> - */
>> - if (hint && wrap) {
>> + if (wrap) {
>> hint = 0;
>> continue;
>
> I think this is wrong. If you start with an offset in the wrap case and
> the bitmap is completely full this will become busy wait until a bit is
> available. The hint check is what make you break out of the loop early,
> after wrapping, re-walking the entire bitmap and failing to find any
> available space.
Ah yes, you are right, thanks for your explanation. Here we need to check
"hint && wrap" to avoid wrap repeatedly.
Will drop this change in the next version.
>
>> @@ -160,8 +155,13 @@ static int __sbitmap_get_word(unsigned long *word, unsigned long depth,
>> break;
>>
>> hint = nr + 1;
Here we overwrite hint, may cause repeated wrap. So I think it's clearer that
we set "wrap" to false after we wrap?
```
if (wrap) {
wrap = false;
hint = 0;
continue;
}
```
Thanks!
>> - if (hint >= depth - 1)
>> - hint = 0;
>> + if (hint >= depth) {
>> + if (wrap) {
>> + hint = 0;
>> + continue;
>> + }
>> + return -1;
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> return nr;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-21 3:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-20 9:45 [PATCH 0/6] sbitmap: fix offset hint wrap and some optimizations chengming.zhou
2023-07-20 9:45 ` [PATCH 1/6] sbitmap: fix hint wrap in the failure case chengming.zhou
2023-07-20 19:06 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-21 3:51 ` Chengming Zhou [this message]
2023-07-20 9:45 ` [PATCH 2/6] sbitmap: fix round-robin non-wrap find with hint > 0 chengming.zhou
2023-07-20 9:45 ` [PATCH 3/6] sbitmap: don't loop twice in find_next_zero_bit() chengming.zhou
2023-07-20 9:45 ` [PATCH 4/6] sbitmap: remove offset wrap logic when finding bit in word chengming.zhou
2023-07-20 9:45 ` [PATCH 5/6] sbitmap: wake_index doesn't need to be atomic_t chengming.zhou
2023-07-20 9:45 ` [PATCH 6/6] sbitmap: check ws_active before check waitqueues chengming.zhou
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2488062c-6338-824e-8cbe-fe1bc3add18e@linux.dev \
--to=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=krisman@suse.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=osandov@fb.com \
--cc=zhouchengming@bytedance.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome