linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
To: Rongwei Wang <rongwei.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@suse.cz,
	roman.gushchin@linux.dev, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
	rientjes@google.com, penberg@kernel.org, cl@linux.com,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/slub: fix the race between validate_slab and slab_free
Date: Sun, 29 May 2022 11:37:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YpNa4tB/jfW3MDyi@n2.us-central1-a.c.spheric-algebra-350919.internal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220529081535.69275-1-rongwei.wang@linux.alibaba.com>

On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 04:15:33PM +0800, Rongwei Wang wrote:
> In use cases where allocating and freeing slab frequently, some
> error messages, such as "Left Redzone overwritten", "First byte
> 0xbb instead of 0xcc" would be printed when validating slabs.
> That's because an object has been filled with SLAB_RED_INACTIVE,
> but has not been added to slab's freelist. And between these
> two states, the behaviour of validating slab is likely to occur.
> 
> Actually, it doesn't mean the slab can not work stably. But, these
> confusing messages will disturb slab debugging more or less.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rongwei Wang <rongwei.wang@linux.alibaba.com>

Have you observed it or it's from code inspection?

> ---
>  mm/slub.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index ed5c2c03a47a..310e56d99116 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -1374,15 +1374,12 @@ static noinline int free_debug_processing(
>  	void *head, void *tail, int bulk_cnt,
>  	unsigned long addr)
>  {
> -	struct kmem_cache_node *n = get_node(s, slab_nid(slab));
>  	void *object = head;
>  	int cnt = 0;
> -	unsigned long flags, flags2;
> +	unsigned long flags;
>  	int ret = 0;
>  
> -	spin_lock_irqsave(&n->list_lock, flags);
> -	slab_lock(slab, &flags2);
> -
> +	slab_lock(slab, &flags);
>  	if (s->flags & SLAB_CONSISTENCY_CHECKS) {
>  		if (!check_slab(s, slab))
>  			goto out;
> @@ -1414,8 +1411,7 @@ static noinline int free_debug_processing(
>  		slab_err(s, slab, "Bulk freelist count(%d) invalid(%d)\n",
>  			 bulk_cnt, cnt);
>  
> -	slab_unlock(slab, &flags2);
> -	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
> +	slab_unlock(slab, &flags);
>  	if (!ret)
>  		slab_fix(s, "Object at 0x%p not freed", object);
>  	return ret;
> @@ -3304,7 +3300,7 @@ static void __slab_free(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
>  
>  {
>  	void *prior;
> -	int was_frozen;
> +	int was_frozen, to_take_off = 0;
>  	struct slab new;
>  	unsigned long counters;
>  	struct kmem_cache_node *n = NULL;
> @@ -3315,15 +3311,19 @@ static void __slab_free(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
>  	if (kfence_free(head))
>  		return;
>  
> +	n = get_node(s, slab_nid(slab));
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&n->list_lock, flags);
> +

Oh please don't do this.

SLUB free slowpath can be hit a lot depending on workload.

__slab_free() try its best not to take n->list_lock. currently takes n->list_lock
only when the slab need to be taken from list.

Unconditionally taking n->list_lock will degrade performance.

>  	if (kmem_cache_debug(s) &&
> -	    !free_debug_processing(s, slab, head, tail, cnt, addr))
> +	    !free_debug_processing(s, slab, head, tail, cnt, addr)) {
> +
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
>  		return;
> +	}
>  
>  	do {
> -		if (unlikely(n)) {
> -			spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
> -			n = NULL;
> -		}
> +		if (unlikely(to_take_off))
> +			to_take_off = 0;
>  		prior = slab->freelist;
>  		counters = slab->counters;
>  		set_freepointer(s, tail, prior);
> @@ -3343,18 +3343,11 @@ static void __slab_free(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
>  				new.frozen = 1;
>  
>  			} else { /* Needs to be taken off a list */
> -
> -				n = get_node(s, slab_nid(slab));
>  				/*
> -				 * Speculatively acquire the list_lock.
>  				 * If the cmpxchg does not succeed then we may
> -				 * drop the list_lock without any processing.
> -				 *
> -				 * Otherwise the list_lock will synchronize with
> -				 * other processors updating the list of slabs.
> +				 * drop this behavior without any processing.
>  				 */
> -				spin_lock_irqsave(&n->list_lock, flags);
> -
> +				to_take_off = 1;
>  			}
>  		}
>  
> @@ -3363,8 +3356,9 @@ static void __slab_free(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
>  		head, new.counters,
>  		"__slab_free"));
>  
> -	if (likely(!n)) {
> +	if (likely(!to_take_off)) {
>  
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&n->list_lock, flags);
>  		if (likely(was_frozen)) {
>  			/*
>  			 * The list lock was not taken therefore no list
> 
> -- 
> 2.27.0
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-05-29 11:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-29  8:15 [PATCH 1/3] mm/slub: fix the race between validate_slab and slab_free Rongwei Wang
2022-05-29  8:15 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/slub: improve consistency of nr_slabs count Rongwei Wang
2022-05-29 12:26   ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-05-29  8:15 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm/slub: add nr_full count for debugging slub Rongwei Wang
2022-05-29 11:37 ` Hyeonggon Yoo [this message]
2022-05-30 21:14   ` [PATCH 1/3] mm/slub: fix the race between validate_slab and slab_free David Rientjes
2022-06-02 15:14     ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-03  3:35       ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-07 12:14         ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-08  3:04           ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-08 12:23             ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-11  4:04               ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-13 13:50                 ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-14  2:38                   ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-17  7:55                   ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-17 14:19                     ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-18  2:33                       ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-20 11:57                         ` Christoph Lameter
2022-06-26 16:48                           ` Rongwei Wang
2022-06-17  9:40               ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-07-15  8:05                 ` Rongwei Wang
2022-07-15 10:33                   ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-07-15 10:51                     ` Rongwei Wang
2022-05-31  3:47   ` Muchun Song
2022-06-04 11:05     ` Hyeonggon Yoo
2022-05-31  8:50   ` Rongwei Wang
2022-07-18 11:09 ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-07-19 14:15   ` Rongwei Wang
2022-07-19 14:21     ` Vlastimil Babka
2022-07-19 14:43       ` Rongwei Wang

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=YpNa4tB/jfW3MDyi@n2.us-central1-a.c.spheric-algebra-350919.internal \
    --to=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=penberg@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=rongwei.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /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).