Re: Boot failure on emev2/kzm9d (was: Re: [PATCH v2 11/11] mm/slab: lockless decision to grow cache)
From: Joonsoo Kim <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 02:21:22
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
Subsystem:
memory management, the rest · Maintainers:
Andrew Morton, Linus Torvalds
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:45:14PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi Joonsoo, On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Joonsoo Kim [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:31:23AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:quoted
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Joonsoo Kim [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 09:43:13PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:quoted
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 6:51 AM, [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
From: Joonsoo Kim <redacted> To check whther free objects exist or not precisely, we need to grab a lock. But, accuracy isn't that important because race window would be even small and if there is too much free object, cache reaper would reap it. So, this patch makes the check for free object exisistence not to hold a lock. This will reduce lock contention in heavily allocation case. Note that until now, n->shared can be freed during the processing by writing slabinfo, but, with some trick in this patch, we can access it freely within interrupt disabled period. Below is the result of concurrent allocation/free in slab allocation benchmark made by Christoph a long time ago. I make the output simpler. The number shows cycle count during alloc/free respectively so less is better. * Before Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(32): Average=248/966 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(64): Average=261/949 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(128): Average=314/1016 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(256): Average=741/1061 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(512): Average=1246/1152 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(1024): Average=2437/1259 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(2048): Average=4980/1800 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(4096): Average=9000/2078 * After Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(32): Average=344/792 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(64): Average=347/882 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(128): Average=390/959 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(256): Average=393/1067 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(512): Average=683/1229 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(1024): Average=1295/1325 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(2048): Average=2513/1664 Kmalloc N*alloc N*free(4096): Average=4742/2172 It shows that allocation performance decreases for the object size up to 128 and it may be due to extra checks in cache_alloc_refill(). But, with considering improvement of free performance, net result looks the same. Result for other size class looks very promising, roughly, 50% performance improvement. v2: replace kick_all_cpus_sync() with synchronize_sched(). Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <redacted>I've bisected a boot failure (no output at all) in v4.7-rc2 on emev2/kzm9d (Renesas dual Cortex A9) to this patch, which is upstream commit 801faf0db8947e01877920e848a4d338dd7a99e7. I've attached my .config. I don't know if it also happens with shmobile_defconfig, as something went wrong with my remote access to the board, preventing further testing. I also couldn't verify if the issue persists in v4.7-rc3.In the mean time, I've verified it also happens with shmobile_defconfig.quoted
quoted
Do you have a clue?I don't have yet. Could you help me to narrow down the problem? Following diff is half-revert change to check that synchronize_sched() has no problem.Thanks! Unfortunately the half revert is not sufficient. The full revert is.Thanks for quick testing! Could I ask one more time to check that synchronize_sched() is root cause of the problem? Testing following two diffs will be helpful to me. Thanks. ------->8--------diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c index 763096a..d892364 100644 --- a/mm/slab.c +++ b/mm/slab.c@@ -965,7 +965,7 @@ static int setup_kmem_cache_node(struct kmem_cache *cachep, * freed after synchronize_sched(). */ if (force_change) - synchronize_sched(); + kick_all_cpus_sync(); fail: kfree(old_shared);Works.quoted
------->8------diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c index 763096a..38d99c2 100644 --- a/mm/slab.c +++ b/mm/slab.c@@ -964,8 +964,6 @@ static int setup_kmem_cache_node(struct kmem_cache *cachep, * guaranteed to be valid until irq is re-enabled, because it will be * freed after synchronize_sched(). */ - if (force_change) - synchronize_sched(); fail: kfree(old_shared);Also works. Note that I do not see this problem on any of the other boards I use, one of which is also a dual Cortex A9.
Thanks for your help! It's curious that synchronize_sched() has some effect in this early phase. In synchronize_sched(), rcu_blocking_is_gp() is called and it checks num_online_cpus <= 1. If so, synchronize_sched() does nothing. It would be related to might_sleep() in rcu_blocking_is_gp() but I'm not sure now. First, I'd like to confirm that num_online_cpus() is correct. Could you try following patch and give me a dmesg? Thanks. ------->8----------
diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c
index 763096a..5b7300a 100644
--- a/mm/slab.c
+++ b/mm/slab.c@@ -964,8 +964,10 @@ static int setup_kmem_cache_node(struct kmem_cache *cachep, * guaranteed to be valid until irq is re-enabled, because it will be * freed after synchronize_sched(). */ - if (force_change) - synchronize_sched(); + if (force_change) { + WARN_ON_ONCE(num_online_cpus() <= 1); + WARN_ON_ONCE(num_online_cpus() > 1); + } fail: kfree(old_shared); --
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>