From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/kmemleak: Prevent soft lockup in first object iteration loop of kmemleak_scan()
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 18:15:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YqjCGWmM2cGG1OOF@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220612183301.981616-4-longman@redhat.com>
On Sun, Jun 12, 2022 at 02:33:01PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> @@ -1437,10 +1440,25 @@ static void kmemleak_scan(void)
> #endif
> /* reset the reference count (whiten the object) */
> object->count = 0;
> - if (color_gray(object) && get_object(object))
> + if (color_gray(object) && get_object(object)) {
> list_add_tail(&object->gray_list, &gray_list);
> + gray_list_cnt++;
> + object_pinned = true;
> + }
>
> raw_spin_unlock_irq(&object->lock);
> +
> + /*
> + * With object pinned by a positive reference count, it
> + * won't go away and we can safely release the RCU read
> + * lock and do a cond_resched() to avoid soft lockup every
> + * 64k objects.
> + */
> + if (object_pinned && !(gray_list_cnt & 0xffff)) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + cond_resched();
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + }
I'm not sure this gains much. There should be very few gray objects
initially (those passed to kmemleak_not_leak() for example). The
majority should be white objects.
If we drop the fine-grained object->lock, we could instead take
kmemleak_lock outside the loop with a cond_resched_lock(&kmemleak_lock)
within the loop. I think we can get away with not having an
rcu_read_lock() at all for list traversal with the big lock outside the
loop.
The reason I added it in the first kmemleak incarnation was to defer
kmemleak_object freeing as it was causing a re-entrant call into the
slab allocator. I later went for fine-grained locking and RCU list
traversal but I may have overdone it ;).
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-14 17:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-12 18:32 [PATCH 0/3] mm/kmemleak: Avoid soft lockup in kmemleak_scan() Waiman Long
2022-06-12 18:32 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm/kmemleak: Use _irq lock/unlock variants in kmemleak_scan/_clear() Waiman Long
2022-06-13 7:15 ` Muchun Song
2022-06-14 15:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-06-12 18:33 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/kmemleak: Skip unlikely objects in kmemleak_scan() without taking lock Waiman Long
2022-06-14 16:54 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-06-14 17:17 ` Waiman Long
2022-06-12 18:33 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm/kmemleak: Prevent soft lockup in first object iteration loop of kmemleak_scan() Waiman Long
2022-06-14 17:15 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2022-06-14 17:27 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-06-14 18:22 ` Waiman Long
2022-06-14 18:28 ` Waiman Long
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=YqjCGWmM2cGG1OOF@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.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