mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Qian Cai <cai@gmx.us>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	arnd@arndb.de, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] debugobjects: add a new Kconfig for POOL_SIZE
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 11:19:37 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0c6a79c8-dde2-dee9-efb0-5cf3d1b3949e@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1542640658.12945.41.camel@gmx.us>

On 11/19/2018 10:17 AM, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-11-19 at 09:51 -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 11/19/2018 08:27 AM, Qian Cai wrote:
>>> On 11/19/18 at 3:09 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>
>>>> Qian,
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2018, Qian Cai wrote:
>>>>>> On Nov 18, 2018, at 1:21 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2018, Qian Cai wrote:
>>>>>>> As the results, systems have 60+ CPUs with both timer and workqueue
>>>>>>> objects enabled could trigger "ODEBUG: Out of memory. ODEBUG
>>>>>>> disabled".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hence, add a new Kconfig option so users could adjust
>>>>>>> ODEBUG_POOL_SIZE
>>>>>>> accordingly if either timer or workqueue objects are selected.
>>>>>> why do we need a config option, when the required number can be
>>>>>> deduced
>>>>>> already from the active CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_* and NR_CPUS?
>>>>>>
>>>>> It because I am worry about the coupling between the implementation
>>>>> details of
>>>>> timers and workqueue objects, and the computation in the code you
>>>>> mentioned
>>>>> here. For example, people could change workqueue.c to have different
>>>>> number
>>>>> of worekqueues initialized during the early boot in the future which is
>>>>> going to
>>>>> affect the required pool size, and I am not sure if people are going to
>>>>> adjust the
>>>>> code in debugobjects.c here as well when they made changes like that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, the computation could become so complex depends on lots of config
>>>>> options like perf, hrtimer, and combinations that I have not tested so
>>>>> far which is
>>>>> difficult to exhausted all the possibilities.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hence, I feel like the Kconfig option is more flexible and less error-
>>>>> prone.
>>>> Quite the contrary. Config options are a pain and truly error-prone if you
>>>> want to compile general purpose kernels as distributions do.
>>>>
>>> Ah, I never thought distributions people would
>>> enable those debugging options.
>> Distros like RHEL usually ship two kernels - one for production and one
>> for debug. The debug kernel does have debugobjects enabled.
>>
> Right, I can remember that now . However, if I understand correctly, since the
> early static pool size needs to be determined during the compilation time, it
> depends on the No. CPUs are from the machines that built the distro kernels.
> Then, when users use those distro kernels, they are not going to have correct
> the pool size according to the No. CPUs on their test machines.

I see your point. Perhaps you can make ODEBUG_POOL_SIZE scales with
CONFIG_NR_CPUS like

#define ODEBUG_POOL_SIZE    (1024 + CONFIG_NR_CPUS * 2)

CONFIG_NR_CPUS is usually set to a lot higher than the actual number of
CPUs in a typical system. So you don't want to set the multiplier too high.

Cheers,
Longman


  reply	other threads:[~2018-11-19 16:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-11-18  8:22 Qian Cai
2018-11-18 18:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-11-18 18:56   ` Qian Cai
2018-11-19  8:09     ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-11-19 13:27       ` Qian Cai
2018-11-19 14:51         ` Waiman Long
2018-11-19 15:17           ` Qian Cai
2018-11-19 16:19             ` Waiman Long [this message]
2018-11-19 16:25               ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-11-19 16:32                 ` Qian Cai
2018-11-18 22:08 ` [PATCH v2] " Qian Cai

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=0c6a79c8-dde2-dee9-efb0-5cf3d1b3949e@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=cai@gmx.us \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®