linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] mm: cma: add trace events to debug physically-contiguous memory allocations

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <550B2FEF.7060204@partner.samsung.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Mar 2015 23:22:07 +0300
From:	Stefan Strogin <s.strogin@...tner.samsung.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
	aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
	Dmitry Safonov <d.safonov@...tner.samsung.com>,
	Pintu Kumar <pintu.k@...sung.com>,
	Weijie Yang <weijie.yang@...sung.com>,
	Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>,
	SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>,
	Hui Zhu <zhuhui@...omi.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Dyasly Sergey <s.dyasly@...sung.com>,
	Vyacheslav Tyrtov <v.tyrtov@...sung.com>,
	Aleksei Mateosian <a.mateosian@...sung.com>,
	gregory.0xf0@...il.com, sasha.levin@...cle.com, gioh.kim@....com,
	pavel@....cz, stefan.strogin@...il.com,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] mm: cma: add trace events to debug
 physically-contiguous memory allocations


On 17/03/15 10:40, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Stefan Strogin <s.strogin@...tner.samsung.com> wrote:
> 
>>> +TRACE_EVENT(cma_alloc,
>>> +
>>> +	TP_PROTO(struct cma *cma, struct page *page, int count),
>>> +
>>> +	TP_ARGS(cma, page, count),
>>> +
>>> +	TP_STRUCT__entry(
>>> +		__field(struct page *, page)
>>> +		__field(unsigned long, count)
>>> +	),
>>> +
>>> +	TP_fast_assign(
>>> +		__entry->page = page;
>>> +		__entry->count = count;
>>> +	),
>>> +
>>> +	TP_printk("page=%p pfn=%lu count=%lu",
>>> +		  __entry->page,
>>> +		  __entry->page ? page_to_pfn(__entry->page) : 0,
>>> +		  __entry->count)
> 
> So I'm wondering, the fast-assign side is not equivalent to the 
> TP_printk() side:
> 
>>> +		__entry->page = page;
>>> +		  __entry->page ? page_to_pfn(__entry->page) : 0,
> 
> to me it seems it would be useful if MM tracing standardized on pfn 
> printing. Just like you did for trace_cma_release().
> 

Hello Ingo, thank you for the reply.
I afraid there is no special sense in printing both struct page * and
pfn. But cma_alloc() returns struct page *, cma_release receives struct
page *, and pr_debugs in these functions print struct page *. Maybe it
would be better to print the same here too?

> Also:
> 
>>> +		  __entry->page ? page_to_pfn(__entry->page) : 0,
> 
> pfn 0 should probably be reserved for the true 0th pfn - those exist 
> in some machines. Returning -1ll could be the 'no such pfn' condition?
> 

I took this from trace_mm_page_alloc() and other trace events from
trace/events/kmem.h. If we return -1 here to indicate "no such pfn",
should we change do this in kmem.h too?

>>> +	TP_STRUCT__entry(
>>> +		__field(unsigned long, pfn)
> 
> Btw., does pfn always fit into 32 bits on 32-bit platforms?
> 

Well, I think it does. cma_release() uses 'unsigned long' on all platforms.

>>> +		__field(unsigned long, count)
> 
> Does this have to be 64-bit on 64-bit platforms?
> 

Oops! I'm terribly wrong.
+		__field(unsigned int, count)

I guess it shouldn't be 64-bit on 64-bit platforms. It's the number of
pages being freed, and in cma_release() 'unsigned int' is used for it.

>>> +	),
>>> +
>>> +	TP_fast_assign(
>>> +		__entry->pfn = pfn;
>>> +		__entry->count = count;
>>> +	),
>>> +
>>> +	TP_printk("pfn=%lu page=%p count=%lu",
>>> +		  __entry->pfn,
>>> +		  pfn_to_page(__entry->pfn),
>>> +		  __entry->count)
> 
> So here you print more in the TP_printk() line than in the fast-assign 
> side.
> 

See above, I think it's the same case as in trace_cma_alloc() TP_printk().

> Again I'd double check the various boundary conditions.
> 

Sorry, I don't quite understand. Boundary conditions are already [should
be] checked in cma_alloc()/cma_release, we should only pass to a trace
event the information we want to be known, isn't it so?

I again terribly sorry, I also completely forgot about struct cma *
being passed to trace event. I think either it should be used somehow
(e.g. to print the number of CMA region) or shouldn't be passed...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/