From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: Juntong Deng <juntong.deng@outlook.com>
Cc: glider@google.com, dvyukov@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kfence: Replace local_clock() with ktime_get_boot_fast_ns()
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 21:35:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANpmjNPvDhyEcc0DdxrL8hVd0rZ-J4k95R5M5AwoeSotg-HCVg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <VI1P193MB0752A2F21C050D701945B62799BAA@VI1P193MB0752.EURP193.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 at 21:01, Juntong Deng <juntong.deng@outlook.com> wrote:
>
> The time obtained by local_clock() is the local CPU time, which may
> drift between CPUs and is not suitable for comparison across CPUs.
>
> It is possible for allocation and free to occur on different CPUs,
> and using local_clock() to record timestamps may cause confusion.
The same problem exists with printk logging.
> ktime_get_boot_fast_ns() is based on clock sources and can be used
> reliably and accurately for comparison across CPUs.
You may be right here, however, the choice of local_clock() was
deliberate: it's the same timestamp source that printk uses.
Also, on systems where there is drift, the arch selects
CONFIG_HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK (like on x86) and the drift is
generally bounded.
> Signed-off-by: Juntong Deng <juntong.deng@outlook.com>
> ---
> mm/kfence/core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/kfence/core.c b/mm/kfence/core.c
> index 3872528d0963..041c03394193 100644
> --- a/mm/kfence/core.c
> +++ b/mm/kfence/core.c
> @@ -295,7 +295,7 @@ metadata_update_state(struct kfence_metadata *meta, enum kfence_object_state nex
> track->num_stack_entries = num_stack_entries;
> track->pid = task_pid_nr(current);
> track->cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
> - track->ts_nsec = local_clock(); /* Same source as printk timestamps. */
> + track->ts_nsec = ktime_get_boot_fast_ns();
You have ignored the comment placed here - now it's no longer the same
source as printk timestamps. I think not being able to correlate
information from KFENCE reports with timestamps in lines from printk
is worse.
For now, I have to Nack: Unless you can prove that
ktime_get_boot_fast_ns() can still be correlated with timestamps from
printk timestamps, I think this change only trades one problem for
another.
Thanks,
-- Marco
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-22 20:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-22 20:00 Juntong Deng
2023-11-22 20:35 ` Marco Elver [this message]
2023-11-22 21:36 ` Juntong Deng
2023-11-22 22:19 ` Marco Elver
2023-11-23 9:29 ` Juntong Deng
2023-11-23 9:42 ` Marco Elver
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=CANpmjNPvDhyEcc0DdxrL8hVd0rZ-J4k95R5M5AwoeSotg-HCVg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=elver@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=juntong.deng@outlook.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/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