Make the output of radix tree test suite less verbose by default and add
-v and -vv command line options for increasing level of verbosity.
Signed-off-by: Rehas Sachdeva <aquannie@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
The random iteration test only inserts order-0 entries currently.
Update it to insert entries of order between 7 and 0. Also make the
maximum index configurable, make some variables static, make the test
duration variable, remove some useless spinning, and add a fifth thread
which calls tag_tagged_items().
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480369871-5271-62-git-send-email-mawilcox@linuxonhyperv.com
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
Tested-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>
Cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This fixes several interlinked problems with the iterators in the
presence of multiorder entries.
1. radix_tree_iter_next() would only advance by one slot, which would
result in the iterators returning the same entry more than once if
there were sibling entries.
2. radix_tree_next_slot() could return an internal pointer instead of
a user pointer if a tagged multiorder entry was immediately followed by
an entry of lower order.
3. radix_tree_next_slot() expanded to a lot more code than it used to
when multiorder support was compiled in. And I wasn't comfortable with
entry_to_node() being in a header file.
Fixing radix_tree_iter_next() for the presence of sibling entries
necessarily involves examining the contents of the radix tree, so we now
need to pass 'slot' to radix_tree_iter_next(), and we need to change the
calling convention so it is called *before* dropping the lock which
protects the tree. Also rename it to radix_tree_iter_resume(), as some
people thought it was necessary to call radix_tree_iter_next() each time
around the loop.
radix_tree_next_slot() becomes closer to how it looked before multiorder
support was introduced. It only checks to see if the next entry in the
chunk is a sibling entry or a pointer to a node; this should be rare
enough that handling this case out of line is not a performance impact
(and such impact is amortised by the fact that the entry we just
processed was a multiorder entry). Also, radix_tree_next_slot() used to
force a new chunk lookup for untagged entries, which is more expensive
than the out of line sibling entry skipping.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480369871-5271-55-git-send-email-mawilcox@linuxonhyperv.com
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
Tested-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>
Cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Each thread needs to register itself with RCU, otherwise the reading
thread's read lock has no effect and the freeing thread will free the
memory in the tree without waiting for the read lock to be dropped.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480369871-5271-42-git-send-email-mawilcox@linuxonhyperv.com
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
Tested-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>
Cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Instead of reseeding the random number generator every time around the
loop in big_gang_check(), seed it at the beginning of execution. Use
rand_r() and an independent base seed for each thread in
iteration_test() so they don't stomp all over each others state. Since
this particular test depends on the kernel scheduler, the iteration test
can't be reproduced based purely on the random seed, but at least it
won't pollute the other tests.
Print the seed, and allow the seed to be specified so that a run which
hits a problem can be reproduced.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1480369871-5271-41-git-send-email-mawilcox@linuxonhyperv.com
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>
Cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
There are four cases I can see where we could end up with a NULL 'slot' in
radix_tree_next_slot(). This unit test exercises all four of them, making
sure that if in the future we have an unsafe path through
radix_tree_next_slot(), we'll catch it.
Here are details on the four cases:
1) radix_tree_iter_retry() via a non-tagged iteration like
radix_tree_for_each_slot(). In this case we currently aren't seeing a bug
because radix_tree_iter_retry() sets
iter->next_index = iter->index;
which means that in in the else case in radix_tree_next_slot(), 'count' is
zero, so we skip over the while() loop and effectively just return NULL
without ever dereferencing 'slot'.
2) radix_tree_iter_retry() via tagged iteration like
radix_tree_for_each_tagged(). This case was giving us NULL pointer
dereferences in testing, and was fixed with this commit:
commit 3cb9185c67 ("radix-tree: fix radix_tree_iter_retry() for tagged
iterators.")
This fix doesn't explicitly check for 'slot' being NULL, though, it works
around the NULL pointer dereference by instead zeroing iter->tags in
radix_tree_iter_retry(), which makes us bail out of the if() case in
radix_tree_next_slot() before we dereference 'slot'.
3) radix_tree_iter_next() via via a non-tagged iteration like
radix_tree_for_each_slot(). This currently happens in shmem_tag_pins()
and shmem_partial_swap_usage().
As with non-tagged iteration, 'count' in the else case of
radix_tree_next_slot() is zero, so we skip over the while() loop and
effectively just return NULL without ever dereferencing 'slot'.
4) radix_tree_iter_next() via tagged iteration like
radix_tree_for_each_tagged(). This happens in shmem_wait_for_pins().
radix_tree_iter_next() zeros out iter->tags, so we end up exiting
radix_tree_next_slot() here:
if (flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_TAGGED) {
void *canon = slot;
iter->tags >>= 1;
if (unlikely(!iter->tags))
return NULL;
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160815194237.25967-3-ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Rehas Sachdeva