From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AE40C433DB for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 16:31:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46ABA64F53 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 16:31:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237635AbhCDQap (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Mar 2021 11:30:45 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:27653 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233617AbhCDQaN (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Mar 2021 11:30:13 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1614875327; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=YpSURyUOQ7K49DdMRd5zDzKMruiP6n7rZFHnlx3RvHY=; b=ipFyVylqU+5T3MvC+iIwrZajC60DnG8Lw56pplPdn7mE0s0gh8OTU728pR/mZIPNYXLFSY onctcnskSGYqAILKqoPXfNxFA0GLcF5kNx7xgjKzPDlop8FgrtpqiJR+AwKVdCMATQKOmC FmECEiE/hHoSPaVRvz5a563/rHi8/ns= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-183-R7ntc0zgMn-DKf1gmRsHgw-1; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 11:28:44 -0500 X-MC-Unique: R7ntc0zgMn-DKf1gmRsHgw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 872D6108BD0B; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 16:28:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.113.171] (ovpn-113-171.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.171]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2465919C48; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 16:28:34 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: be more verbose for alloc_contig_range faliures To: Minchan Kim Cc: Michal Hocko , Andrew Morton , linux-mm , LKML , joaodias@google.com References: <20210217163603.429062-1-minchan@kernel.org> <2f167b3c-5f0a-444a-c627-49181fc8fe0d@redhat.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 17:28:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04.03.21 17:23, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 05:10:52PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 04.03.21 17:01, Minchan Kim wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 09:23:49AM -0800, Minchan Kim wrote: >>>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 10:28:12AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: >>>>> On Thu 18-02-21 08:19:50, Minchan Kim wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 10:43:21AM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>>>> On 18.02.21 10:35, Michal Hocko wrote: >>>>>>>> On Thu 18-02-21 10:02:43, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 18.02.21 09:56, Michal Hocko wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Wed 17-02-21 08:36:03, Minchan Kim wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> alloc_contig_range is usually used on cma area or movable zone. >>>>>>>>>>> It's critical if the page migration fails on those areas so >>>>>>>>>>> dump more debugging message like memory_hotplug unless user >>>>>>>>>>> specifiy __GFP_NOWARN. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I agree with David that this has a potential to generate a lot of output >>>>>>>>>> and it is not really clear whether it is worth it. Page isolation code >>>>>>>>>> already has REPORT_FAILURE mode which currently used only for the memory >>>>>>>>>> hotplug because this was just too noisy from the CMA path - d381c54760dc >>>>>>>>>> ("mm: only report isolation failures when offlining memory"). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Maybe migration failures are less likely to fail but still. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Side note: I really dislike that uncontrolled error reporting on memory >>>>>>>>> offlining path we have enabled as default. Yeah, it might be useful for >>>>>>>>> ZONE_MOVABLE in some cases, but otherwise it's just noise. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Just do a "sudo stress-ng --memhotplug 1" and see the log getting flooded >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Anyway we can discuss this in a separate thread but I think this is not >>>>>>>> a representative workload. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sure, but the essence is "this is noise", and we'll have more noise on >>>>>>> alloc_contig_range() as we see these calls more frequently. There should be >>>>>>> an explicit way to enable such *debug* messages. >>>>>> >>>>>> alloc_contig_range already has gfp_mask and it respects __GFP_NOWARN. >>>>>> Why shouldn't people use it if they don't care the failure? >>>>>> Semantically, it makes sense to me. >>>> >>>> Sorry for the late response. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Well, alloc_contig_range doesn't really have to implement all the gfp >>>>> flags. This is a matter of practicality. alloc_contig_range is quite >>>>> different from the page allocator because it is to be expected that it >>>>> can fail the request. This is avery optimistic allocation request. That >>>>> would suggest that complaining about allocation failures is rather >>>>> noisy. >>>> >>>> That was why I'd like to approach for per-call site indicator with >>>> __GFP_NOWARN. Even though it was allocation from CMA, some of them >>>> wouldn't be critical for the failure so those wouldn't care of >>>> the failure. cma_alloc already has carried on "bool no_warn" >>>> which was changed into gfp_t recently. What alloc_contig_range >>>> should do is to take care of the request. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Now I do understand that some users would like to see why those >>>>> allocations have failed. The question is whether that information is >>>>> generally useful or it is more of a debugging aid. The amount of >>>>> information is also an important aspect. It would be rather unfortunate >>>>> to dump thousands of pages just because they cannot be migrated. >>>> >>>> Totally, agree dumping thounds of pages as debugging aid are bad. >>>> Couldn't we simply ratelimit them like other places? >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I do not have a strong opinion here. We can make all alloc_contig_range >>>>> users use GFP_NOWARN by default and only skip the flag from the cma >>>>> allocator but I am slowly leaning towards (ab)using dynamic debugging >>>> >>>> I agree the rest of the places are GFP_NOWARN by default except CMA >>>> if they expect alloc_contig_range are optimistic allocation request. >>>> However, I'd like to tweak it for CMA - accept gfp_t from cma_alloc >>>> and take care of the __GFP_NOWARN since some sites of CMA could be >>>> fault tolerant so no need to get the warning. >>> >>> Any thought to proceed? >> >> IMHO, add some proper debug mechanisms and don't try squeezing debug >> messages into "WARN" semantics. >> >> Any alloc_contig_range() user can benefit from that. > > So the point is how we could add proper debug mechanism here. > Think about call site A is not critical for the failure but > called very frquently. Call site B is critical for the failure > but called very rarely so turns on system wide dynamic debugging. > You could see a lot of debug message from A even though we > dont't want it. Even, it could hide B's debugging message > by ratelimiting. Do you have a real life example how this would be an issue? This sounds like a purely theoretical construct. You want to debug something, so you try triggering it and capturing debug data. There are not that many alloc_contig_range() users such that this would really be an issue to isolate ... Strictly speaking: any allocation failure on ZONE_MOVABLE or CMA is problematic (putting aside NORETRY logic and similar aside). So any such page you hit is worth investigating and, therefore, worth getting logged for debugging purposes. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb