linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>,
	linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:XFS FILESYSTEM" <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: block: DMA alignment of IO buffer allocated from slab
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 18:52:20 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c844c598-be1d-bef4-fb99-09cf99571fd7@virtuozzo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1537801706.195115.7.camel@acm.org>



On 09/24/2018 06:08 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 17:43 +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>>
>> On 09/24/2018 05:19 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> On 9/24/18 2:46 AM, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>>>> On 09/24/2018 01:42 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 03:04:18PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>>>>>> Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 05:15:43PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>>>>>>>> 1) does kmalloc-N slab guarantee to return N-byte aligned buffer?  If
>>>>>>>> yes, is it a stable rule?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is the assumption in a lot of the kernel, so I think if somethings
>>>>>>> breaks this we are in a lot of pain.
>>>>
>>>> This assumption is not correct. And it's not correct at least from the beginning of the
>>>> git era, which is even before SLUB allocator appeared. With CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB=y
>>>> the same as with CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON=y kmalloc return 'unaligned' objects.
>>>> The guaranteed arch-and-config-independent alignment of kmalloc() result is "sizeof(void*)".
>>
>> Correction sizeof(unsigned long long), so 8-byte alignment guarantee.
>>
>>>>
>>>> If objects has higher alignment requirement, the could be allocated via specifically created kmem_cache.
>>>
>>> Hello Andrey,
>>>
>>> The above confuses me. Can you explain to me why the following comment is present in include/linux/slab.h?
>>>
>>> /*
>>>  * kmalloc and friends return ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN aligned
>>>  * pointers. kmem_cache_alloc and friends return ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN
>>>  * aligned pointers.
>>>  */
>>>
>>
>> ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN - guaranteed alignment of the kmalloc() result.
>> ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN - guaranteed alignment of kmem_cache_alloc() result.
>>
>> If the 'align' argument passed into kmem_cache_create() is bigger than ARCH_SLAB_MINALIGN
>> than kmem_cache_alloc() from that cache should return 'align'-aligned pointers.
> 
> Hello Andrey,
> 
> Do you realize that that comment from <linux/slab.h> contradicts what you
> wrote about kmalloc() if ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN > sizeof(unsigned long long)?
> 

No, I don't see the contradiction. I said that arch-and-config-independent alignment is 8-bytes (at first I said that sizeof(void*), but corrected later)
If some arch defines "ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN > sizeof(unsigned long long)" than on that arch kmalloc() guarantee to return > 8 bytes
aligned pointer, but that become arch-dependent alignment.

I just realized that my phrase "kmalloc return 'unaligned' objects" is very confusing.
By 'unaligned' objects, I meant that kmalloc-N doesn't return N-bytes aligned object.
ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN alignment is always guaranteed.

> Additionally, shouldn't CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB=y and CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON=y
> provide the same guarantees as with debugging disabled, namely that kmalloc()
> buffers are aligned on ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN boundaries? Since buffers
> allocated with kmalloc() are often used for DMA, how otherwise is DMA assumed
> to work?
> 

Yes, with CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB=y, CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON=y kmalloc() guarantees that result is aligned on ARCH_KMALLOC_MINALIGN boundary.


> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-24 15:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-19  9:15 block: DMA alignment of IO buffer allocated from slab Ming Lei
2018-09-19  9:41 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2018-09-19 10:02   ` Ming Lei
2018-09-19 11:15     ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2018-09-20  1:28       ` Ming Lei
2018-09-20  3:59         ` Yang Shi
2018-09-20  6:32         ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-20  6:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-21 13:04   ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2018-09-21 13:05     ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-21 15:00       ` Jens Axboe
2018-09-24 16:06       ` Christopher Lameter
2018-09-24 17:49         ` Jens Axboe
2018-09-24 18:00           ` Christopher Lameter
2018-09-24 18:09             ` Jens Axboe
2018-09-25  7:49               ` Dave Chinner
2018-09-25 15:44                 ` Jens Axboe
2018-09-25 21:04                 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-09-23 22:42     ` Ming Lei
2018-09-24  9:46       ` Andrey Ryabinin
2018-09-24 14:19         ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-24 14:43           ` Andrey Ryabinin
2018-09-24 15:08             ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-24 15:52               ` Andrey Ryabinin [this message]
2018-09-24 15:58                 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-24 16:07                   ` Andrey Ryabinin
2018-09-24 16:19                     ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-24 16:47                       ` Christopher Lameter
2018-09-24 18:57                       ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-09-24 19:56                         ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-24 20:41                           ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-09-24 20:54                             ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-24 21:09                               ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-09-25  0:16                         ` Ming Lei
2018-09-25  3:28                           ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-09-25  4:10                             ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-25  4:44                               ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-09-25  6:55                                 ` Ming Lei
2018-09-24 15:17           ` Christopher Lameter
2018-09-25  0:20             ` Ming Lei
2018-09-20 14:07 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-09-21  1:56 ` Dave Chinner
2018-09-21  7:08   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-09-21  7:25     ` Ming Lei
2018-09-21 14:59       ` Jens Axboe

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=c844c598-be1d-bef4-fb99-09cf99571fd7@virtuozzo.com \
    --to=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=tom.leiming@gmail.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vkuznets@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).