Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1352609

Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test

Show all headers | View raw

On 03/07/2016 04:16 PM, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote:
>
>
> On 2016/3/7 12:34, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 03:35:26PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>> On 2016/3/4 14:38, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 02:05:09PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>>> On 2016/3/4 12:32, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 11:02:33AM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 08:49:01PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2016/3/3 15:42, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 2016-03-03 10:25 GMT+09:00 Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>:
>>>>>>>>>> (cc -mm and Joonsoo Kim)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 03/02/2016 05:52 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I came across a suspicious error for CMA stress test:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Before the test, I got:
>>>>>>>>>>> -bash-4.3# cat /proc/meminfo | grep Cma
>>>>>>>>>>> CmaTotal:         204800 kB
>>>>>>>>>>> CmaFree:          195044 kB
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> After running the test:
>>>>>>>>>>> -bash-4.3# cat /proc/meminfo | grep Cma
>>>>>>>>>>> CmaTotal:         204800 kB
>>>>>>>>>>> CmaFree:         6602584 kB
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So the freed CMA memory is more than total..
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Also the the MemFree is more than mem total:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -bash-4.3# cat /proc/meminfo
>>>>>>>>>>> MemTotal:       16342016 kB
>>>>>>>>>>> MemFree:        22367268 kB
>>>>>>>>>>> MemAvailable:   22370528 kB
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>> I played with this a bit and can see the same problem. The sanity
>>>>>>>>>> check of CmaFree < CmaTotal generally triggers in
>>>>>>>>>> __move_zone_freepage_state in unset_migratetype_isolate.
>>>>>>>>>> This also seems to be present as far back as v4.0 which was the
>>>>>>>>>> first version to have the updated accounting from Joonsoo.
>>>>>>>>>> Were there known limitations with the new freepage accounting,
>>>>>>>>>> Joonsoo?
>>>>>>>>> I don't know. I also played with this and looks like there is
>>>>>>>>> accounting problem, however, for my case, number of free page is slightly less
>>>>>>>>> than total. I will take a look.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hanjun, could you tell me your malloc_size? I tested with 1 and it doesn't
>>>>>>>>> look like your case.
>>>>>>>> I tested with malloc_size with 2M, and it grows much bigger than 1M, also I
>>>>>>>> did some other test:
>>>>>>> Thanks! Now, I can re-generate erronous situation you mentioned.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   - run with single thread with 100000 times, everything is fine.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   - I hack the cam_alloc() and free as below [1] to see if it's lock issue, with
>>>>>>>>     the same test with 100 multi-thread, then I got:
>>>>>>> [1] would not be sufficient to close this race.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Try following things [A]. And, for more accurate test, I changed code a bit more
>>>>>>> to prevent kernel page allocation from cma area [B]. This will prevent kernel
>>>>>>> page allocation from cma area completely so we can focus cma_alloc/release race.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Although, this is not correct fix, it could help that we can guess
>>>>>>> where the problem is.
>>>>>> More correct fix is something like below.
>>>>>> Please test it.
>>>>> Hmm, this is not working:
>>>> Sad to hear that.
>>>>
>>>> Could you tell me your system's MAX_ORDER and pageblock_order?
>>>>
>>>
>>> MAX_ORDER is 11, pageblock_order is 9, thanks for your help!
>>
>> Hmm... that's same with me.
>>
>> Below is similar fix that prevents buddy merging when one of buddy's
>> migrate type, but, not both, is MIGRATE_ISOLATE. In fact, I have
>> no idea why previous fix (more correct fix) doesn't work for you.
>> (It works for me.) But, maybe there is a bug on the fix
>> so I make new one which is more general form. Please test it.
>
> Hi,
> 	Hanjun Guo has gone to Tailand on business, so I help him to run this patch. The result
> shows that the count of "CmaFree:" is OK now.

Thanks Leizhen :)

> But sometimes printed some information as below:
>
> alloc_contig_range: [28500, 28600) PFNs busy
> alloc_contig_range: [28300, 28380) PFNs busy

I think it's not a problem for the stress test, as it's
the lock not released yet.

Thanks
Hanjun

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-03-07 05:40 +0100
  Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> - 2016-03-07 09:20 +0100
    Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com> - 2016-03-07 19:50 +0100
      Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> - 2016-03-08 03:00 +0100
        Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> - 2016-03-09 02:30 +0100
          Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 16:10 +0100
            Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-11 18:10 +0100
              Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-03-14 07:50 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-14 08:10 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-03-14 08:20 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-14 13:40 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 15:20 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-16 13:10 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com> - 2016-03-16 10:50 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-03-17 08:00 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com> - 2016-03-17 10:30 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 16:40 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-17 16:50 +0100
                Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 17:00 +0100
    Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> - 2016-03-08 05:10 +0100
  Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-07 14:00 +0100
    Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-03-08 08:50 +0100
      Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com> - 2016-03-08 11:50 +0100
        Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> - 2016-03-08 16:40 +0100
          Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com> - 2016-03-09 03:20 +0100

csiph-web