linux-kernel - Re: Performance regressions in "boot

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]

Date:   Mon, 30 Nov 2020 18:55:32 +0200
From:   Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To:     Rahul Gopakumar <gopakumarr@...are.com>
Cc:     "bhe@...hat.com" <bhe@...hat.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "natechancellor@...il.com" <natechancellor@...il.com>,
        "ndesaulniers@...gle.com" <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        "clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com" 
        <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        "rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Rajender M <manir@...are.com>,
        Yiu Cho Lau <lauyiuch@...are.com>,
        Peter Jonasson <pjonasson@...are.com>,
        Venkatesh Rajaram <rajaramv@...are.com>
Subject: Re: Performance regressions in "boot_time" tests in Linux 5.8 Kernel

Hi Rahul,

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 03:03:40PM +0000, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> Hi Baoquan,
> 
> We applied the new patch to 5.10 rc3 and tested it. We are still
> observing the same page corruption issue which we saw with the
> old patch. This is causing 3 secs delay in boot time.
> 
> Attached dmesg log from the new patch and also from vanilla
> 5.10 rc3 kernel.
> 
> There are multiple lines like below in the dmesg log of the
> new patch.
> 
> "BUG: Bad page state in process swapper  pfn:ab08001"

Can you please run your test with the below patch and send output of

	dmesg | grep defer


diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index eaa227a479e4..ce7ec660c777 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -455,6 +455,7 @@ defer_init(int nid, unsigned long pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
 	nr_initialised++;
 	if ((nr_initialised > PAGES_PER_SECTION) &&
 	    (pfn & (PAGES_PER_SECTION - 1)) == 0) {
+		pr_info("=> %s: nid: %d pfn: %lx\n", __func__, nid, pfn);
 		NODE_DATA(nid)->first_deferred_pfn = pfn;
 		return true;
 	}

> ________________________________________
> From: bhe@...hat.com <bhe@...hat.com>
> Sent: 22 November 2020 6:38 AM
> To: Rahul Gopakumar
> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; akpm@...ux-foundation.org; natechancellor@...il.com; ndesaulniers@...gle.com; clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com; rostedt@...dmis.org; Rajender M; Yiu Cho Lau; Peter Jonasson; Venkatesh Rajaram
> Subject: Re: Performance regressions in "boot_time" tests in Linux 5.8 Kernel
> 
> On 11/20/20 at 03:11am, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> > Hi Baoquan,
> >
> > To which commit should we apply the draft patch. We tried applying
> > the patch to the commit 3e4fb4346c781068610d03c12b16c0cfb0fd24a3
> > (the one we used for applying the previous patch) but it fails.
> 
> I tested on 5.10-rc3+. You can append below change to the old patch in
> your testing kernel.
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index fa6076e1a840..5e5b74e88d69 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -448,6 +448,8 @@ defer_init(int nid, unsigned long pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
>         if (end_pfn < pgdat_end_pfn(NODE_DATA(nid)))
>                 return false;
> 
> +       if (NODE_DATA(nid)->first_deferred_pfn != ULONG_MAX)
> +               return true;
>         /*
>          * We start only with one section of pages, more pages are added as
>          * needed until the rest of deferred pages are initialized.
> 




-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.