linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Chris Mason <clm@meta.com>, Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@oracle.com>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
	"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.com>,
	"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 10/19] slab: remove cpu (partial) slabs usage from allocation paths
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2026 16:41:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <01cf95d7-4e38-43c6-80ef-c990f66f1e26@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9a00f5c2-7c9b-44c3-a2ac-357f46f25095@meta.com>

On 1/10/26 14:20, Chris Mason wrote:
> On 1/9/26 3:16 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 10/24/25 16:29, Chris Mason wrote:
>>> On Thu, 23 Oct 2025 15:52:32 +0200 Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> wrote:
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
>> By the way, there was another bug in this patch, causing a severe memory
>> leak, which the AI unfortunately didn't flag. Petr reported it during
>> performance testing and it took me more than a day to find it. Oh well :)
>> 
>> Wonder if things got better since then perhaps, and your or Roman's tools
>> would find it today? :)
> 
> Yes and no.  It didn't find the leak until I changed the prompt to say:
> "there is a leak, find it".  I'll see if I can improve things...

Thanks. Hmm even if it has to be done like this, it could be a substantial
time saver vs finding the leak myself.

>> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
>> --- a/mm/slub.c
>> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
>> @@ -3592,54 +3549,53 @@ static void *get_partial_node(struct kmem_cache *s,
>>  	else if (!spin_trylock_irqsave(&n->list_lock, flags))
>>  		return NULL;
>>  	list_for_each_entry_safe(slab, slab2, &n->partial, slab_list) {
>> +
>> +		struct freelist_counters old, new;
>> +
>>  		if (!pfmemalloc_match(slab, pc->flags))
>>  			continue;
>>
>>  		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SLUB_TINY) || kmem_cache_debug(s)) {
>> -			void *object = alloc_single_from_partial(s, n, slab,
>> +			object = alloc_single_from_partial(s, n, slab,
>>  							pc->orig_size);
>> -			if (object) {
>> -				partial = slab;
>> -				pc->object = object;
>> +			if (object)
>>  				break;
>> -			}
>>  			continue;
>>  		}
>>
>> +		/*
>> +		 * get a single object from the slab. This might race against
>> +		 * __slab_free(), which however has to take the list_lock if
>> +		 * it's about to make the slab fully free.
>> +		 */
>> +		do {
>> +			old.freelist = slab->freelist;
>> +			old.counters = slab->counters;
>> +
>> +			new.freelist = get_freepointer(s, old.freelist);
>> +			new.counters = old.counters;
>> +			new.inuse++;
>> +
>> +		} while (!__slab_update_freelist(s, slab, &old, &new, "get_partial_node"));
>> +
>> +		object = old.freelist;
>> +		if (!new.freelist)
>> +			remove_partial(n, slab);
> 
> Is there a missing break statement here? The debug path above breaks out
> of the loop after successfully allocating an object, but this non-debug
> path continues iterating through the partial list. Each iteration overwrites
> the object variable, so previously allocated objects would be leaked.
> 
> The commit message says "Now we only want to return a single object" which
> matches the debug path behavior, but the non-debug path appears to allocate
> from every matching slab in the list.
> 
>> 	}
>>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
>> -	return partial;
>> +	return object;
>>  }
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2026-01-10 15:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-23 13:52 [PATCH RFC 00/19] slab: replace cpu (partial) slabs with sheaves Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 01/19] slab: move kfence_alloc() out of internal bulk alloc Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 15:20   ` Marco Elver
2025-10-29 14:38     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-29 15:30       ` Marco Elver
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 02/19] slab: handle pfmemalloc slabs properly with sheaves Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 14:21   ` Chris Mason
2025-10-29 15:00     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-29 16:06       ` Chris Mason
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 03/19] slub: remove CONFIG_SLUB_TINY specific code paths Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 22:34   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-29 15:37     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 04/19] slab: prevent recursive kmalloc() in alloc_empty_sheaf() Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 05/19] slab: add sheaves to most caches Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-27  0:24   ` Harry Yoo
2025-10-29 15:42     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 06/19] slab: introduce percpu sheaves bootstrap Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 15:29   ` Chris Mason
2025-10-29 15:51     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-12-15 12:17   ` Hao Li
2025-12-15 15:20     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 07/19] slab: make percpu sheaves compatible with kmalloc_nolock()/kfree_nolock() Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 14:04   ` Chris Mason
2025-10-29 17:30     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 19:43   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-29 17:46     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 08/19] slab: handle kmalloc sheaves bootstrap Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-27  6:12   ` Harry Yoo
2025-10-29 20:06     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-29 20:06       ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-30  0:11         ` Harry Yoo
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 09/19] slab: add optimized sheaf refill from partial list Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-27  7:20   ` Harry Yoo
2025-10-27  9:11     ` Harry Yoo
2025-10-29 20:48     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-30  0:07       ` Harry Yoo
2025-10-30 13:18         ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 10/19] slab: remove cpu (partial) slabs usage from allocation paths Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 14:29   ` Chris Mason
2025-10-29 21:31     ` Vlastimil Babka
2026-01-09  8:16     ` Vlastimil Babka
2026-01-10 13:20       ` Chris Mason
2026-01-10 15:41         ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2025-10-30  4:32   ` Harry Yoo
2025-10-30 13:09     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-30 15:27       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-30 15:35         ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-30 15:59           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-11-03  3:44           ` Harry Yoo
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 11/19] slab: remove SLUB_CPU_PARTIAL Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 20:43   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-29 22:31     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-30  0:26       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 12/19] slab: remove the do_slab_free() fastpath Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 22:32   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-29 22:44     ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-30  0:24       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 13/19] slab: remove defer_deactivate_slab() Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 14/19] slab: simplify kmalloc_nolock() Vlastimil Babka
2025-12-16  2:35   ` Hao Li
2026-01-09 10:11     ` Vlastimil Babka
2026-01-09 11:48       ` Hao Li
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 15/19] slab: remove struct kmem_cache_cpu Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 16/19] slab: remove unused PREEMPT_RT specific macros Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 17/19] slab: refill sheaves from all nodes Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 18/19] slab: update overview comments Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-23 13:52 ` [PATCH RFC 19/19] slab: remove frozen slab checks from __slab_free() Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 23:57 ` [PATCH RFC 00/19] slab: replace cpu (partial) slabs with sheaves Alexei Starovoitov
2025-11-04 22:11 ` Christoph Lameter (Ampere)

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=01cf95d7-4e38-43c6-80ef-c990f66f1e26@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=cl@gentwo.org \
    --cc=clm@meta.com \
    --cc=harry.yoo@oracle.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=ptesarik@suse.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.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