From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux-RT-Users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/vmstat: Protect per cpu variables with preempt disable on RT
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 15:42:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <91b2f893-eb6a-d91d-3769-baba8601b0f6@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210804095425.GA6464@techsingularity.net>
On 8/4/21 11:54 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 01:54:47AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>> <tglx> so in vmstat.c there is this magic comment:
>> <tglx> * For use when we know that interrupts are disabled
>> <tglx> * or when we know that preemption is disabled and that
>> <tglx> * particular counter cannot be updated from interrupt context.
>> <tglx> how can I know which counters need what?
>> <mm_expert> I don't think there's a list, one would have to check on counter to counter basis :/
>> <tglx> and of course there is nothing which validates that, right?
>> <mm_expert> exactly
>>
>
> While I'm not "mm_expert", I agree with his/her statements.
Phew, since you do, I can now disclose it was me.
> Each counter
> would need to be audited and two question are asked
>
> o If this counter is inaccurate, does anything break?
> o If this counter is inaccurate, does it both increment and decrement
> allowing the possibility it goes negative?
>
> The decision on that is looking at the counter and seeing if any
> functional decision is made based on its value. So two examples;
>
> NR_VMSCAN_IMMEDIATE is a node-based counter that only every
> increments and is reported to userspace. No kernel code makes
> any decision based on its value. Therefore it's likely safe to
> move to numa_stat_item instead.
>
> Action: move it
>
> WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_FILE is a node-based counter that is used to
> determine if a mem cgroup is potentially congested by looking at
> the ratio of cgroup to node refault rates as well as deciding if
> LRU file pages should be deactivate. If that value drifts, the
> ratios are miscalculated and could lead to functional oddities
> and therefore must be accurate.
>
> Action: leave it alone
>
> I guess it could be further split into state that must be accurate from
> IRQ and non-IRQ contexts but that probably would be very fragile and
> offer limited value.
>
>> Brilliant stuff which prevents you to do any validation on this. Over
>> the years there have been several issues where callers had to be fixed
>> by analysing bug reports instead of having a proper instrumentation in
>> that code which would have told the developer that he got it wrong.
>>
>
> I'm not sure it could be validated at build-time but I'm just back from
> holiday and may be lacking imagination.
The idea was not build-time, but runtime (hidden behind lockdep, VM_DEBUG or
whatnot), i.e.:
<sched_expert> what that code needs is switch(item) { case foo1: case foo2:
lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled(); break; case bar1: case bar2:
lockdep_assert_preempt_disabled(); lockdep_assert_no_in_irq(); break; } or
something along those lines
>> Of course on RT kernels the preempt_disable_rt() will serialize
>> everything correctly, but as we have learned over the years just
>> slapping _if_rt() or if_not_rt() variants of things around is most of
>> the time papering over the underlying problem of badly defined
>> protection scopes. Let's not proliferate that. As I said in the above
>> IRC conversation:
>>
>> <tglx> I fundamentally hate this preempt_disable_rt() muck
>>
>
> The issue is that even if this was properly audited and the inaccurate
> and accurate counters were in the proper enums using the correct APIs, it
> would still be necessary to protect the accurate counters from updates from
> IRQ context. Hence, as I write this, I don't think preempt_[dis|en]able_rt
> would go away and that is why I didn't continue with the series to break
> out "accurate" stats
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-04 13:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-23 10:00 [PATCH 0/2] Protect vmstats on PREEMPT_RT Mel Gorman
2021-07-23 10:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] preempt: Provide preempt_*_(no)rt variants Mel Gorman
2021-07-23 10:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm/vmstat: Protect per cpu variables with preempt disable on RT Mel Gorman
2021-08-03 23:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-08-04 9:54 ` Mel Gorman
2021-08-04 13:42 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2021-08-04 14:23 ` Mel Gorman
2021-08-05 12:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-08-05 14:04 ` Mel Gorman
2021-08-05 15:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-08-05 18:47 ` Daniel Vacek
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=91b2f893-eb6a-d91d-3769-baba8601b0f6@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).