From: Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.de>
To: Rongwei Wang <rongwei.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
songmuchun@bytedance.com, Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@suse.cz,
roman.gushchin@linux.dev, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
penberg@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/slub: fix the race between validate_slab and slab_free
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 15:50:46 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2206131548420.295113@gentwo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <02298c0e-3293-9deb-f1ed-6d8862f7c349@linux.alibaba.com>
On Sat, 11 Jun 2022, Rongwei Wang wrote:
> > Ok so the idea is to take the lock only if kmem_cache_debug. That looks
> > ok. But it still adds a number of new branches etc to the free loop.
> >
> > Some performance tests would be useful.
> Hi Christoph
>
> Thanks for your time!
> Do you have some advice in benchmarks that need me to test? And I find that
> hackbench and lkp was used frequently in mm/slub.c commits[1,2]. But I have no
> idea how to use these two benchmarks test to cover the above changes. Can you
> give some examples? Thanks very much!
Hi Rongwei,
Well run hackbench with an without the change.
There are also synthetic benchmarks available at
https://gentwo.org/christoph/slub/tests/
These measure the cycles that slab operations take. However, they are a
bit old and I think Pekka may have a newer version of these
patches.
Greetings,
Christoph
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-13 13:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-29 8:15 Rongwei Wang
2022-05-29 8:15 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/slub: improve consistency of nr_slabs count Rongwei Wang
2022-05-29 12:26 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-05-29 8:15 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm/slub: add nr_full count for debugging slub Rongwei Wang
2022-05-29 11:37 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm/slub: fix the race between validate_slab and slab_free Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-05-30 21:14 ` David Rientjes
2022-06-02 15:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-03 3:35 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-07 12:14 ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-08 3:04 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-08 12:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-11 4:04 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-13 13:50 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2022-06-14 2:38 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-17 7:55 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-17 14:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-18 2:33 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-20 11:57 ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-26 16:48 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-17 9:40 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-07-15 8:05 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-07-15 10:33 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-07-15 10:51 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-05-31 3:47 ` Muchun Song
2022-06-04 11:05 ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-05-31 8:50 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-07-18 11:09 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-07-19 14:15 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-07-19 14:21 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-07-19 14:43 ` Rongwei Wang
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=alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2206131548420.295113@gentwo.de \
--to=cl@gentwo.de \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rongwei.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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