From: "David Wang" <00107082@163.com>
To: "Suren Baghdasaryan" <surenb@google.com>
Cc: kent.overstreet@linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
yuzhao@google.com
Subject: Re: Abnormal values show up in /proc/allocinfo
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2024 15:16:03 +0800 (CST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <337c721a.70d1.1936753c377.Coremail.00107082@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51c19b31.eaf.193660912f7.Coremail.00107082@163.com>
Hi,
At 2024-11-26 09:14:50, "David Wang" <00107082@163.com> wrote:
>
>Hi,
>
>
>
>At 2024-11-26 04:31:39, "Suren Baghdasaryan" <surenb@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>Hi David,
>>Could you please check if you have this fix:
>>
>>ed265529d39a "mm/codetag: fix arg in pgalloc_tag_copy alloc_tag_sub"
>>
>>It was merged after v6.12-rc6 and it fixes an accounting bug inside
>>pgalloc_tag_copy(), which is used during compaction.
>>Thanks,
>>Suren.
>>
>>
>>https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240906042108.1150526-3-yuzhao@google.com/
>>https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241022232440.334820-1-souravpanda@google.com/
>
>
>No, ed265529d39a is not in 6.12.0; It is now in Linus' tree.
>I will pull the code and make some tests.
>
>Will update later.
I build a kernel based on a tree with top commit 9f16d5e6f220,
no abnormal value observed for compaction_alloc:
$ sudo cat /proc/allocinfo | grep compaction_alloc
0 0 mm/compaction.c:1880 func:compaction_alloc 250098
(The last column is accumulative call counters I patched with my system, meaning compaction_alloc do happen)
But, still got underflowed values:
-4096 18446744073709551615 mm/filemap.c:3788 func:do_read_cache_folio 18
-86241280 18446744073709530561 mm/filemap.c:1951 func:__filemap_get_folio 8691015
Finally a procedure to reproduce it: (thanks for the tip about compact_memory)
1. populate file caches, e.g. grep something in kernel source.
2. echo 1 >/proc/sys/vm/compact_memory
3. echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
There would be negative values show up.
A simple python script to check abnormal values:
with open("/proc/allocinfo") as f:
for l in f:
try:
vs = l.split()
v1, v2 = int(vs[0]), int(vs[1])
if v1<0 or v2<0 or (v1==0 and v2!=0) or (v1!=0 and v2==0): print l,
except: pass
Most likely, memory release is accounted *twice* for those memory.
Reading through the code, I feel the most suspected code would be:
clear_page_tag_ref(&old->page);
This line of code may not work as expected.
The code in pgalloc_tag_copy involves too many low level plumbing details, I think it
is simpler to just implement a *swap* logic: just swap the tags.
I made following changes and it works, no abnormal values detected, so far.
(pgalloc_tag_copy should be renamed to pgalloc_tag_swap)
diff --git a/lib/alloc_tag.c b/lib/alloc_tag.c
index 2414a7ee7ec7..7d6d1015f4b1 100644
--- a/lib/alloc_tag.c
+++ b/lib/alloc_tag.c
@@ -191,24 +192,30 @@ void pgalloc_tag_split(struct folio *folio, int old_order, int new_order)
void pgalloc_tag_copy(struct folio *new, struct folio *old)
{
- union pgtag_ref_handle handle;
- union codetag_ref ref;
- struct alloc_tag *tag;
+ union pgtag_ref_handle handle_new, handle_old;
+ union codetag_ref ref_new, ref_old;
+ struct alloc_tag *tag_new, *tag_old;
- tag = pgalloc_tag_get(&old->page);
- if (!tag)
+ tag_old = pgalloc_tag_get(&old->page);
+ if (!tag_old)
+ return;
+ tag_new = pgalloc_tag_get(&new->page);
+ if (!tag_new)
return;
- if (!get_page_tag_ref(&new->page, &ref, &handle))
+ if (!get_page_tag_ref(&old->page, &ref_old, &handle_old))
+ return;
+ if (!get_page_tag_ref(&new->page, &ref_new, &handle_new))
return;
- /* Clear the old ref to the original allocation tag. */
- clear_page_tag_ref(&old->page);
- /* Decrement the counters of the tag on get_new_folio. */
- alloc_tag_sub(&ref, folio_size(new));
- __alloc_tag_ref_set(&ref, tag);
- update_page_tag_ref(handle, &ref);
- put_page_tag_ref(handle);
+ /* swap tag */
+ __alloc_tag_ref_set(&ref_new, tag_old);
+ update_page_tag_ref(handle_new, &ref_new);
+ put_page_tag_ref(handle_new);
+
+ __alloc_tag_ref_set(&ref_old, tag_new);
+ update_page_tag_ref(handle_old, &ref_old);
+ put_page_tag_ref(handle_old);
}
static void shutdown_mem_profiling(bool remove_file)
FYI
David
>
>Thanks~
>David
>
>>
>>> > >Thanks,
>>> > >Suren.
>>> > >
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Thanks
>>> > >> David
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-26 7:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-24 7:43 David Wang
2024-11-25 0:35 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-11-25 1:01 ` David Wang
2024-11-25 10:09 ` David Wang
2024-11-25 17:31 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-11-25 20:31 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-11-26 1:14 ` David Wang
2024-11-26 7:16 ` David Wang [this message]
2024-11-26 17:10 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-11-27 9:44 ` David Wang
2024-11-28 8:34 ` David Wang
2024-11-28 18:46 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2024-11-28 19:58 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
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=337c721a.70d1.1936753c377.Coremail.00107082@163.com \
--to=00107082@163.com \
--cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=yuzhao@google.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®