From: Harry Yoo <harry@kernel.org>
To: Hao Li <hao.li@linux.dev>
Cc: Pengpeng Hou <pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] mm/slub: preserve one previous object lifetime
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 12:10:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aqPDpORERiVkBmBf@thinkstation> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aoLcw91-afP2Mjtb@fedora>
On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 06:30:51PM +0800, Hao Li wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 12:12:44AM +0800, Pengpeng Hou wrote:
> > SLAB_STORE_USER replaces the allocation track when an object is reused. A
> > later stale free can then replace the free track as well, leaving the
> > report without the completed lifetime that created the stale reference.
Can we explicitly mention "double free" to make it more straightforward?
It confused me twice already ;-)
> > Store one additional alloc/free pair. Before recording a new allocation,
> > copy the current pair to the previous slots only when both records exist.
Hmm we should probably instead:
1. Copy TRACK_ALLOC to TRACK_PREV_ALLOC before updating TRACK_ALLOC
2. Copy TRACK_FREE to TRACK_PREV_FREE before updating TRACK_FREE
I feel thinking of one pair as one 'lifetime' adds quite some confusion
because TRACK_ALLOC/TRACK_FREE sometimes form a 'lifetime', but
sometimes span more than one lifetime.
> > Keep the current free track intact to preserve existing SLAB_STORE_USER
> > behavior during the reuse window.
> >
> > Print the previous pair when available. These records are diagnostic
> > history and do not infer semantic ownership.
> >
> > Assisted-by: Codex:gpt-5
> > Signed-off-by: Pengpeng Hou <pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn>
> > ---
> > mm/slub.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> > index 0653def0fe36..355fbffb981f 100644
> > --- a/mm/slub.c
> > +++ b/mm/slub.c
> > @@ -1113,12 +1130,22 @@ static void print_track(const char *s, struct track *t, unsigned long pr_time)
> >
> > void print_tracking(struct kmem_cache *s, void *object)
> > {
> > + struct track *prev_alloc;
> > unsigned long pr_time = jiffies;
> > +
> > if (!(s->flags & SLAB_STORE_USER))
> > return;
> >
> > print_track("Allocated", get_track(s, object, TRACK_ALLOC), pr_time);
> > print_track("Freed", get_track(s, object, TRACK_FREE), pr_time);
>
> When object is in allocated state, under normal case, this "Freed" line
> duplicates with the "Freed" line under "Previous object lifetime:"
Good catch!
> Would it make sense to add a check here? something like:
>
> if ("free track" isn't the same as "prev_free track")
Perhaps it's better to never make this condition true to avoid
confusion?
> print_track("Freed", get_track(s, object, TRACK_FREE), pr_time);
Pengpeng, do you plan to respin this?
--
Cheers,
Harry / Hyeonggon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-11 11:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-13 16:08 [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/slub: preserve " Pengpeng Hou
2026-08-13 16:10 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/slub: use a track count for user metadata sizing Pengpeng Hou
2026-08-17 10:04 ` Hao Li
2026-09-10 12:36 ` Harry Yoo
2026-08-13 16:12 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] mm/slub: preserve one previous object lifetime Pengpeng Hou
2026-08-17 10:30 ` Hao Li
2026-09-11 11:10 ` Harry Yoo [this message]
2026-08-13 16:14 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] mm/slub: test previous lifetime tracking Pengpeng Hou
2026-08-13 16:17 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] Documentation/mm: describe SLUB " Pengpeng Hou
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=aqPDpORERiVkBmBf@thinkstation \
--to=harry@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hao.li@linux.dev \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
/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®