Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1359957
| Path | csiph.com!aioe.org!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod |
|---|---|
| From | Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test |
| Date | Thu, 17 Mar 2016 16:40:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <rdIbM-Jr-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <r9Yyu-jj-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <ra8oa-6zK-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <raf6i-2wB-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <raB6N-IC-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rbwRs-7YD-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <rbyJz-11y-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <rcuue-8R-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <rcuNz-ve-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rcuXf-yJ-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <rdgfv-7bg-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <rdA4y-3K4-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rdCpJ-5uU-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Dkim-Signature | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=2ht+4i7tTSH5wAtTqaqIZfZ2pv//SyHg0ETVwqCpj6A=; b=dF9fECUc/dkiIQjlMjyjrdBZYtZnSD4EyNOFjJnBy5beeCoE3omjFh3QMsJkItYR1H aLWfocR+Vmb3dvUGGOs4vTmhLVLEQDXvQwrmY8wB2Du9wngmPnOjNToc/YVtZhObpuFc XQVARDVlX0pxEJXnXFjqgYo3I9wieFpuI2uxPyRvaBdz15qAnyNOQwLA0Oa0NXa0LNWF 8wwd4X034YmTDoJURZLK6FD+/sP/e40fDv2JAyKV0a4IAUhQFdXgMBkqA6NK0cV9dCkF 5+nmvbMRykkSoNMg8BvdhA3+7iYZOenhC6dVlUlWAraJTS/HnUuKp8mR2hOdjMhv3D/J Wltw== |
| X-Google-Dkim-Signature | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=2ht+4i7tTSH5wAtTqaqIZfZ2pv//SyHg0ETVwqCpj6A=; b=Jda1WyU14dojDjvcSzWon7ThxtfTUqyfjhn5j/btIDN6veZ3xmWIoodT2TbVwuwVoh YTHuV9wKDnA04SEa1A1NPaHC1qSqq9ibI7m0LaJdU5YhhGlb/SLXhDQdpf/PwKtD5jVY iTts0uy3KddhdUZRog47v0oc+GwQi2qw5ftsLr61I9UIk0rkxNYxeqRGsnN3uWOURmQD 4Txzs+CTfI2+UauN9sW8ooTHyX6ZlIph57QAYJ3tgGM/bGS0/RLnEBh6eAY6uEfafa/t JMKeKcyzGy9JCOUQekhPb/yL7e4s9CEy4C7We8ddk6l0TzOYOnBTPaSc0A5csq0We3pZ D9ug== |
| X-Gm-Message-State | AD7BkJJAVUxX1wWN69gQUdK52XXS4D4d9i8R2W8j+qCoJxOu7F1xyX7QksjSVms8DpKFJc+3ceEVyjiJtSVjgw== |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| X-Received | by 10.60.92.106 with SMTP id cl10mr6442221oeb.82.1458228674271; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 08:31:14 -0700 (PDT) |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=UTF-8 |
| Sender | robomod@news.nic.it |
| List-ID | <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org> |
| X-Mailing-List | linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org |
| Approved | robomod@news.nic.it |
| Lines | 80 |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
| X-Original-Cc | Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>, Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>, Laura Abbott <lauraa@codeaurora.org>, qiuxishi <qiuxishi@huawei.com>, Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, dingtinahong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>, chenjie6@huawei.com, "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org> |
| X-Original-Date | Fri, 18 Mar 2016 00:31:14 +0900 |
| X-Original-Message-ID | <CAAmzW4PVc+v9NVyqrHZqh6qWaJD8hrwNUVSb6G=vZ3eA76J3yQ@mail.gmail.com> |
| X-Original-References | <56DD38E7.3050107@huawei.com> <56DDCB86.4030709@redhat.com> <56DE30CB.7020207@huawei.com> <56DF7B28.9060108@huawei.com> <CAAmzW4NDJwgq_P33Ru_X0MKXGQEnY5dr_SY1GFutPAqEUAc_rg@mail.gmail.com> <56E2FB5C.1040602@suse.cz> <20160314064925.GA27587@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> <56E662E8.700@suse.cz> <20160314071803.GA28094@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> <56E92AFC.9050208@huawei.com> <20160317065426.GA10315@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> <56EA77BC.2090702@huawei.com> |
| X-Original-Sender | linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org |
| Xref | csiph.com linux.kernel:1359957 |
Show key headers only | View raw
2016-03-17 18:24 GMT+09:00 Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>:
> On 2016/3/17 14:54, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 05:44:28PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>> On 2016/3/14 15:18, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 08:06:16AM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>>>> On 03/14/2016 07:49 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 06:07:40PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03/11/2016 04:00 PM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about something like this? Just and idea, probably buggy (off-by-one etc.).
>>>>>>> Should keep away cost from <pageblock_order iterations at the expense of the
>>>>>>> relatively fewer >pageblock_order iterations.
>>>>>> Hmm... I tested this and found that it's code size is a little bit
>>>>>> larger than mine. I'm not sure why this happens exactly but I guess it would be
>>>>>> related to compiler optimization. In this case, I'm in favor of my
>>>>>> implementation because it looks like well abstraction. It adds one
>>>>>> unlikely branch to the merge loop but compiler would optimize it to
>>>>>> check it once.
>>>>> I would be surprised if compiler optimized that to check it once, as
>>>>> order increases with each loop iteration. But maybe it's smart
>>>>> enough to do something like I did by hand? Guess I'll check the
>>>>> disassembly.
>>>> Okay. I used following slightly optimized version and I need to
>>>> add 'max_order = min_t(unsigned int, MAX_ORDER, pageblock_order + 1)'
>>>> to yours. Please consider it, too.
>>> Hmm, this one is not work, I still can see the bug is there after applying
>>> this patch, did I miss something?
>> I may find that there is a bug which was introduced by me some time
>> ago. Could you test following change in __free_one_page() on top of
>> Vlastimil's patch?
>>
>> -page_idx = pfn & ((1 << max_order) - 1);
>> +page_idx = pfn & ((1 << MAX_ORDER) - 1);
>
> I tested Vlastimil's patch + your change with stress for more than half hour, the bug
> I reported is gone :)
Good to hear!
> I have some questions, Joonsoo, you provided a patch as following:
>
> diff --git a/mm/cma.c b/mm/cma.c
> index 3a7a67b..952a8a3 100644
> --- a/mm/cma.c
> +++ b/mm/cma.c
> @@ -448,7 +448,10 @@ bool cma_release(struct cma *cma, const struct page *pages, unsigned int count)
>
> VM_BUG_ON(pfn + count > cma->base_pfn + cma->count);
>
> + mutex_lock(&cma_mutex);
> free_contig_range(pfn, count);
> + mutex_unlock(&cma_mutex);
> +
> cma_clear_bitmap(cma, pfn, count);
> trace_cma_release(pfn, pages, count);
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 7f32950..68ed5ae 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -1559,7 +1559,8 @@ void free_hot_cold_page(struct page *page, bool cold)
> * excessively into the page allocator
> */
> if (migratetype >= MIGRATE_PCPTYPES) {
> - if (unlikely(is_migrate_isolate(migratetype))) {
> + if (is_migrate_cma(migratetype) ||
> + unlikely(is_migrate_isolate(migratetype))) {
> free_one_page(zone, page, pfn, 0, migratetype);
> goto out;
> }
>
> This patch also works to fix the bug, why not just use this one? is there
> any side effects for this patch? maybe there is performance issue as the
> mutex lock is used, any other issues?
The changes in free_hot_cold_page() would cause unacceptable performance
problem in a big machine, because, with above change, it takes zone->lock
whenever freeing one page on CMA region.
Thanks.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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 Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com> - 2016-03-18 03:20 +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 Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> - 2016-03-18 14:40 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-03-21 05:50 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> - 2016-03-22 16:00 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-03-23 05:50 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-18 15:20 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> - 2016-03-18 15:50 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-18 22:00 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> - 2016-03-22 15:50 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com> - 2016-03-19 08:30 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-19 23:20 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> - 2016-03-23 05:50 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-23 09:30 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 09:40 +0100
Re: Suspicious error for CMA stress test Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-18 13:30 +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