Message ID | 20231218031640.77983-1-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers |
Return-Path: <linux-kernel+bounces-2965-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org> Delivered-To: ouuuleilei@gmail.com Received: by 2002:a05:7300:24d3:b0:fb:cd0c:d3e with SMTP id r19csp1002900dyi; Sun, 17 Dec 2023 19:17:07 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHedvjud/+xV71WuRlSnP20dz1nERUk48EVKRoT6tno5BDXHLjrb5soBtltPLZrVLfipY67 X-Received: by 2002:ac8:584a:0:b0:425:a8a7:54d9 with SMTP id h10-20020ac8584a000000b00425a8a754d9mr21478425qth.19.1702869427371; Sun, 17 Dec 2023 19:17:07 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1702869427; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ITY2kgfM2hNBEA2lYhQYCVuPPsgxpGTtVMnkM1YC3/lJvMXANVo5ZegAT++Bmgh0su 0zdadWehbloxfUGv7jod6cU1orZip7f5hQGtX7c5DPubZizZABR7l/jq45FZiCnH/OYx 04flfrxfmyltcxh60mFBL/OQjpxxsNLIl8n6xDIp7elOqrna8OduxybcpXEuha4FXIXA FMqA6cgxC3V03p8SsxZB0ncjrnJXPjgzxS+swvQ+bC26a9Vq1JzffO5f5I3OrHeSaQkD JK9Tf3TDGYPH/YFkJyiJp1WQGfrZNMyIAnQ+J5EZJo08umklPLDHXqcHvhgf0hCcC1ZF W1yg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:list-unsubscribe :list-subscribe:list-id:precedence:message-id:date:subject:cc:to :from; bh=9i8ATnrDTtVyCKMwexeRFdWe1kstlzXZSL3LNRBLCPQ=; fh=soeW4PH8uPvaMjzm9+qAYQ/kF4sfX0MpVe9LwJ4W9bA=; b=shEvOLpyCjf7u/r+/EE2gUu9+4jQP6O6riFhqOVnjq004XsJXfOboYZYHrR5pYN+VN O8pV2SaPOh292+bWPe7hxzERFT5qm80NrowMZoUj39Q88fuVAzyqULN3Q0EgnXA5YmSm pZ+bm1Cx6bHvvaCquqlHacnsLcf8IBbQB0sbrX2Gex7ZCxEu8vPpJ/6q1lnxXoNhqvEG 5xNFyKCiw/AWtK0MPc9jVsc/mlvhWkRlMsv3T9JDrVbQMdkX82Q1JOHwQIwkK5I0f1K7 hTTRdVKlRojZJ3SLPrNPAOZzEy1YqHjNuwudMLSDdNlEgV4fMKdmwDbJjoIzPI3M/Fv7 Wyew== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-2965-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-2965-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=alibaba.com Received: from ny.mirrors.kernel.org (ny.mirrors.kernel.org. [147.75.199.223]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ge19-20020a05622a5c9300b0042581e3fda0si23616290qtb.657.2023.12.17.19.17.07 for <ouuuleilei@gmail.com> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 17 Dec 2023 19:17:07 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-2965-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-2965-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-2965-ouuuleilei=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=alibaba.com Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ny.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E9131C20C33 for <ouuuleilei@gmail.com>; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 03:17:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39D05538B; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 03:16:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Received: from out30-124.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-124.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC3642582 for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 03:16:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R101e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=ay29a033018045192;MF=jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=5;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0Vye3FGX_1702869400; Received: from localhost(mailfrom:jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0Vye3FGX_1702869400) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Mon, 18 Dec 2023 11:16:40 +0800 From: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> To: shr@devkernel.io, akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com Subject: [PATCH] mm: fix arithmetic for bdi min_ratio and max_ratio Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 11:16:40 +0800 Message-Id: <20231218031640.77983-1-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.19.1.6.gb485710b Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+subscribe@vger.kernel.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+unsubscribe@vger.kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: INBOX X-GMAIL-THRID: 1785588012757848864 X-GMAIL-MSGID: 1785588012757848864 |
Series |
mm: fix arithmetic for bdi min_ratio and max_ratio
|
|
Commit Message
Jingbo Xu
Dec. 18, 2023, 3:16 a.m. UTC
bdi->[min|max]_ratio are both part per million. Fix the wrong
arithmetic when setting bdi's min_ratio and max_ratio.
Fixes: efc3e6ad53ea ("mm: split off __bdi_set_max_ratio() function")
Fixes: 8021fb3232f2 ("mm: split off __bdi_set_min_ratio() function")
Reported-by: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com>
---
mm/page-writeback.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Comments
+cc fsdevel On 12/18/23 11:16 AM, Jingbo Xu wrote: > bdi->[min|max]_ratio are both part per million. Fix the wrong > arithmetic when setting bdi's min_ratio and max_ratio. > > Fixes: efc3e6ad53ea ("mm: split off __bdi_set_max_ratio() function") > Fixes: 8021fb3232f2 ("mm: split off __bdi_set_min_ratio() function") > Reported-by: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com> > Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> > --- > mm/page-writeback.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c > index ee2fd6a6af40..b393b3281ce9 100644 > --- a/mm/page-writeback.c > +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c > @@ -692,7 +692,6 @@ static int __bdi_set_min_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned int min_ra > > if (min_ratio > 100 * BDI_RATIO_SCALE) > return -EINVAL; > - min_ratio *= BDI_RATIO_SCALE; > > spin_lock_bh(&bdi_lock); > if (min_ratio > bdi->max_ratio) { > @@ -729,7 +728,8 @@ static int __bdi_set_max_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned int max_ra > ret = -EINVAL; > } else { > bdi->max_ratio = max_ratio; > - bdi->max_prop_frac = (FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio) / 100; > + bdi->max_prop_frac = div64_u64(FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio, > + 100UL * BDI_RATIO_SCALE); > } > spin_unlock_bh(&bdi_lock); >
On Mon, 18 Dec 2023 11:16:40 +0800 Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > bdi->[min|max]_ratio are both part per million. Fix the wrong > arithmetic when setting bdi's min_ratio and max_ratio. > > Fixes: efc3e6ad53ea ("mm: split off __bdi_set_max_ratio() function") > Fixes: 8021fb3232f2 ("mm: split off __bdi_set_min_ratio() function") As we have two Fixes:, it would be better to have two patches please. > --- a/mm/page-writeback.c > +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c > @@ -692,7 +692,6 @@ static int __bdi_set_min_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned int min_ra > > if (min_ratio > 100 * BDI_RATIO_SCALE) > return -EINVAL; > - min_ratio *= BDI_RATIO_SCALE; > > spin_lock_bh(&bdi_lock); > if (min_ratio > bdi->max_ratio) { > @@ -729,7 +728,8 @@ static int __bdi_set_max_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned int max_ra > ret = -EINVAL; > } else { > bdi->max_ratio = max_ratio; > - bdi->max_prop_frac = (FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio) / 100; > + bdi->max_prop_frac = div64_u64(FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio, > + 100UL * BDI_RATIO_SCALE); > } > spin_unlock_bh(&bdi_lock); Does this change have any observable runtime effects? If so, what are they?
On 12/19/23 2:21 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 18 Dec 2023 11:16:40 +0800 Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > >> bdi->[min|max]_ratio are both part per million. Fix the wrong >> arithmetic when setting bdi's min_ratio and max_ratio. >> >> Fixes: efc3e6ad53ea ("mm: split off __bdi_set_max_ratio() function") >> Fixes: 8021fb3232f2 ("mm: split off __bdi_set_min_ratio() function") > > As we have two Fixes:, it would be better to have two patches please. Sounds reasonable. Thanks. > >> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c >> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c >> @@ -692,7 +692,6 @@ static int __bdi_set_min_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned int min_ra >> >> if (min_ratio > 100 * BDI_RATIO_SCALE) >> return -EINVAL; >> - min_ratio *= BDI_RATIO_SCALE; This indeed has visible runtime effect as follows: # cat /sys/class/bdi/253\:0/min_ratio 0 # cat /sys/class/bdi/253\:0/max_ratio 100 # echo 1 > /sys/class/bdi/253\:0/min_ratio -bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument Setting min_ratio will fail with -EINVAL, as the above code tries to set min_ratio with (min_ratio * BDI_RATIO_SCALE)%, i.e. 10000% in the above example. >> >> spin_lock_bh(&bdi_lock); >> if (min_ratio > bdi->max_ratio) { >> @@ -729,7 +728,8 @@ static int __bdi_set_max_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned int max_ra >> ret = -EINVAL; >> } else { >> bdi->max_ratio = max_ratio; >> - bdi->max_prop_frac = (FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio) / 100; >> + bdi->max_prop_frac = div64_u64(FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio, >> + 100UL * BDI_RATIO_SCALE); >> } >> spin_unlock_bh(&bdi_lock); This one has no visible runtime effect, but I believe this would affect the incrementing of writeout completion count when max_ratio is not 100%.
diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c index ee2fd6a6af40..b393b3281ce9 100644 --- a/mm/page-writeback.c +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c @@ -692,7 +692,6 @@ static int __bdi_set_min_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned int min_ra if (min_ratio > 100 * BDI_RATIO_SCALE) return -EINVAL; - min_ratio *= BDI_RATIO_SCALE; spin_lock_bh(&bdi_lock); if (min_ratio > bdi->max_ratio) { @@ -729,7 +728,8 @@ static int __bdi_set_max_ratio(struct backing_dev_info *bdi, unsigned int max_ra ret = -EINVAL; } else { bdi->max_ratio = max_ratio; - bdi->max_prop_frac = (FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio) / 100; + bdi->max_prop_frac = div64_u64(FPROP_FRAC_BASE * max_ratio, + 100UL * BDI_RATIO_SCALE); } spin_unlock_bh(&bdi_lock);