From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: "P. Christeas" <xrg@linux.gr>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at>,
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Subject: Re: Early test: hangs in mm/compact.c w. Linus's 12d7aacab56e9ef185c
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 15:07:27 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141110060726.GA4900@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <545E96BD.5040103@suse.cz>
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 11:18:37PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 11/08/2014 02:11 PM, P. Christeas wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 November 2014, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday 05 November 2014, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >>>> Can you please try the following patch?
> >>>> - compaction_defer_reset(zone, order, false);
> >> Oh and did I ask in this thread for /proc/zoneinfo yet? :)
> >
> > Using that same kernel[1], got again into a race, gathered a few more data.
> >
> > This time, I had 1x "urpmq" process [2] hung at 100% CPU , when "kwin" got
> > apparently blocked (100% CPU, too) trying to resize a GUI window. I suppose
> > the resizing operation would mean heavy memory alloc/free.
> >
> > The rest of the system was responsive, I could easily get a console, login,
> > gather the files.. Then, I have *killed* -9 the "urpmq" process, which solved
> > the race and my system is still alive! "kwin" is still running, returned to
> > regular CPU load.
> >
> > Attached is traces from SysRq+l (pressed a few times, wanted to "snapshot" the
> > stack) and /proc/zoneinfo + /proc/vmstat
> >
> > Bisection is not yet meaningful, IMHO, because I cannot be sure that "good"
> > points are really free from this issue. I'd estimate that each test would take
> > +3days, unless I really find a deterministic way to reproduce the issue .
>
> Hi,
>
> I think I finally found the cause by staring into the code... CCing
> people from all 4 separate threads I know about this issue.
> The problem with finding the cause was that the first report I got from
> Markus was about isolate_freepages_block() overhead, and later Norbert
> reported that reverting a patch for isolate_freepages* helped. But the
> problem seems to be that although the loop in isolate_migratepages exits
> because the scanners almost meet (they are within same pageblock), they
> don't truly meet, therefore compact_finished() decides to continue, but
> isolate_migratepages() exits immediately... boom! But indeed e14c720efdd7
> made this situation possible, as free scaner pfn can now point to a
> middle of pageblock.
Indeed.
>
> So I hope the attached patch will fix the soft-lockup issues in
> compact_zone. Please apply on 3.18-rc3 or later without any other reverts,
> and test. It probably won't help Markus and his isolate_freepages_block()
> overhead though...
Yes, I found this bug too, but, it can't explain
isolate_freepages_block() overhead. Anyway, I can't find another bug
related to isolate_freepages_block(). :/
> Thanks,
> Vlastimil
>
> ------8<------
> >From fbf8eb0bcd2897090312e23da6a31bad9cc6b337 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
> Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 22:20:43 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] mm, compaction: prevent endless loop in migrate scanner
>
> ---
> mm/compaction.c | 8 ++++++--
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> index ec74cf0..1b7a1be 100644
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -1029,8 +1029,12 @@ static isolate_migrate_t isolate_migratepages(struct zone *zone,
> }
>
> acct_isolated(zone, cc);
> - /* Record where migration scanner will be restarted */
> - cc->migrate_pfn = low_pfn;
> + /*
> + * Record where migration scanner will be restarted. If we end up in
> + * the same pageblock as the free scanner, make the scanners fully
> + * meet so that compact_finished() terminates compaction.
> + */
> + cc->migrate_pfn = (end_pfn <= cc->free_pfn) ? low_pfn : cc->free_pfn;
>
> return cc->nr_migratepages ? ISOLATE_SUCCESS : ISOLATE_NONE;
> }
IMHO, proper fix is not to change this logic, but, to change decision
logic in compact_finished() and in compact_zone(). Maybe helper
function would be good for readability.
Thanks.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-10 6:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-04 7:26 P. Christeas
2014-11-04 8:55 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-11-04 9:36 ` P. Christeas
2014-11-05 15:26 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-11-05 16:02 ` P. Christeas
2014-11-06 19:23 ` P. Christeas
2014-11-06 21:38 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-11-08 13:11 ` P. Christeas
2014-11-08 22:18 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-11-09 8:27 ` Pavel Machek
2014-11-09 9:43 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-11-09 22:32 ` Norbert Preining
2014-11-10 6:07 ` Joonsoo Kim [this message]
2014-11-10 7:53 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-11-10 8:05 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-11-10 8:14 ` P. Christeas
2014-11-09 4:47 Hillf Danton
2014-11-09 8:22 ` P. Christeas
2014-11-09 9:35 ` Vlastimil Babka
2014-11-10 3:23 ` Hillf Danton
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=20141110060726.GA4900@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE \
--to=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=markus@trippelsdorf.de \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=preining@logic.at \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=xrg@linux.gr \
/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