From: Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@oracle.com>
To: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
Cc: Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
penberg@kernel.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: use this_cpu_cmpxchg_double in put_cpu_partial
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 08:57:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <476b5d35-1894-680c-2bd9-b399a3f4d9ed@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADZGycb=kxdqSdbdXNWwmgyWp2CtC3-UFmy1-PqtdgS2BrmyjA@mail.gmail.com>
On 2018/11/25 17:59, Wei Yang wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 10:58 AM zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com> wrote:
>> On 2018/11/17 9:33, Wengang Wang wrote:
>>> The this_cpu_cmpxchg makes the do-while loop pass as long as the
>>> s->cpu_slab->partial as the same value. It doesn't care what happened to
>>> that slab. Interrupt is not disabled, and new alloc/free can happen in the
>>> interrupt handlers. Theoretically, after we have a reference to the it,
>>> stored in _oldpage_, the first slab on the partial list on this CPU can be
>>> moved to kmem_cache_node and then moved to different kmem_cache_cpu and
>>> then somehow can be added back as head to partial list of current
>>> kmem_cache_cpu, though that is a very rare case. If that rare case really
>>> happened, the reading of oldpage->pobjects may get a 0xdead0000
>>> unexpectedly, stored in _pobjects_, if the reading happens just after
>>> another CPU removed the slab from kmem_cache_node, setting lru.prev to
>>> LIST_POISON2 (0xdead000000000200). The wrong _pobjects_(negative) then
>>> prevents slabs from being moved to kmem_cache_node and being finally freed.
>>>
>>> We see in a vmcore, there are 375210 slabs kept in the partial list of one
>>> kmem_cache_cpu, but only 305 in-use objects in the same list for
>>> kmalloc-2048 cache. We see negative values for page.pobjects, the last page
>>> with negative _pobjects_ has the value of 0xdead0004, the next page looks
>>> good (_pobjects is 1).
>>>
>>> For the fix, I wanted to call this_cpu_cmpxchg_double with
>>> oldpage->pobjects, but failed due to size difference between
>>> oldpage->pobjects and cpu_slab->partial. So I changed to call
>>> this_cpu_cmpxchg_double with _tid_. I don't really want no alloc/free
>>> happen in between, but just want to make sure the first slab did expereince
>>> a remove and re-add. This patch is more to call for ideas.
>> Have you hit the really issue or just review the code ?
>>
>> I did hit the issue and fixed in the upstream patch unpredictably by the following patch.
>> e5d9998f3e09 ("slub: make ->cpu_partial unsigned int")
>>
> Zhong,
>
> I took a look into your upstream patch, while I am confused how your patch
> fix this issue?
>
> In put_cpu_partial(), the cmpxchg compare cpu_slab->partial (a page struct)
> instead of the cpu_partial (an unsigned integer). I didn't get the
> point of this fix.
I think the patch can't prevent pobjects from being set as 0xdead0000
(the primary 4 bytes of LIST_POISON2).
But if pobjects is treated as unsigned integer,
2266 pobjects = oldpage->pobjects;
2267 pages = oldpage->pages;
2268 if (drain && pobjects > s->cpu_partial) {
2269 unsigned long flags;
line 2268 will be true in put_cpu_partial(), thus code goes to
unfreeze_partials(). This way the slabs in the cpu partial list can be
moved to kmem_cache_nod and then freed. So it fixes (or say workarounds)
the problem I see here (huge number of empty slabs stay in cpu partial
list).
thanks
wengang
>> Thanks,
>> zhong jiang
>>> Signed-off-by: Wengang Wang <wen.gang.wang@oracle.com>
>>> ---
>>> mm/slub.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++---
>>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
>>> index e3629cd..26539e6 100644
>>> --- a/mm/slub.c
>>> +++ b/mm/slub.c
>>> @@ -2248,6 +2248,7 @@ static void put_cpu_partial(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page, int drain)
>>> {
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_CPU_PARTIAL
>>> struct page *oldpage;
>>> + unsigned long tid;
>>> int pages;
>>> int pobjects;
>>>
>>> @@ -2255,8 +2256,12 @@ static void put_cpu_partial(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page, int drain)
>>> do {
>>> pages = 0;
>>> pobjects = 0;
>>> - oldpage = this_cpu_read(s->cpu_slab->partial);
>>>
>>> + tid = this_cpu_read(s->cpu_slab->tid);
>>> + /* read tid before reading oldpage */
>>> + barrier();
>>> +
>>> + oldpage = this_cpu_read(s->cpu_slab->partial);
>>> if (oldpage) {
>>> pobjects = oldpage->pobjects;
>>> pages = oldpage->pages;
>>> @@ -2283,8 +2288,17 @@ static void put_cpu_partial(struct kmem_cache *s, struct page *page, int drain)
>>> page->pobjects = pobjects;
>>> page->next = oldpage;
>>>
>>> - } while (this_cpu_cmpxchg(s->cpu_slab->partial, oldpage, page)
>>> - != oldpage);
>>> + /* we dont' change tid, but want to make sure it didn't change
>>> + * in between. We don't really hope alloc/free not happen on
>>> + * this CPU, but don't want the first slab be removed from and
>>> + * then re-added as head to this partial list. If that case
>>> + * happened, pobjects may read 0xdead0000 when this slab is just
>>> + * removed from kmem_cache_node by other CPU setting lru.prev
>>> + * to LIST_POISON2.
>>> + */
>>> + } while (this_cpu_cmpxchg_double(s->cpu_slab->partial, s->cpu_slab->tid,
>>> + oldpage, tid, page, tid) == 0);
>>> +
>>> if (unlikely(!s->cpu_partial)) {
>>> unsigned long flags;
>>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-26 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-17 1:33 Wengang Wang
2018-11-17 2:51 ` Wei Yang
2018-11-18 1:02 ` Wei Yang
2018-11-20 17:58 ` Wengang Wang
2018-11-21 3:02 ` Wei Yang
2018-11-21 3:18 ` Wengang Wang
2018-11-22 0:36 ` Wei Yang
2018-11-20 2:18 ` zhong jiang
2018-11-20 18:10 ` Wengang Wang
2018-11-26 1:59 ` Wei Yang
2018-11-26 16:57 ` Wengang Wang [this message]
2018-11-27 0:36 ` Wei Yang
2018-11-27 1:42 ` Wengang Wang
2018-11-27 2:39 ` Wei Yang
2018-11-20 2:25 ` kbuild test robot
2018-11-22 5:48 ` kbuild test robot
2018-11-22 9:00 ` [LKP] [mm] fb420465c9: kernel_BUG_at_mm/slub.c kernel test robot
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=476b5d35-1894-680c-2bd9-b399a3f4d9ed@oracle.com \
--to=wen.gang.wang@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=zhongjiang@huawei.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