| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20230926021103epcms1p413b8c56ba8ce44af67b80cd3df3edf93@epcms1p4>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 11:11:03 +0900
From: 김재원 <jaewon31.kim@...sung.com>
To: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
CC: "rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"tjmercier@...gle.com" <tjmercier@...gle.com>,
"yuzhao@...gle.com" <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
"kaleshsingh@...gle.com" <kaleshsingh@...gle.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"vbabka@...e.cz" <vbabka@...e.cz>,
"hannes@...xchg.org" <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"jaewon31.kim@...il.com" <jaewon31.kim@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] vmscan: add trace events for lru_gen
>Hello,
>
>On Sun, 24 Sep 2023 23:23:43 +0900 Jaewon Kim <jaewon31.kim@...sung.com> wrote:
>
>> As the legacy lru provides, the lru_gen needs some trace events for
>> debugging.
>>
>> This commit introduces 2 trace events.
>> trace_mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan
>> trace_mm_vmscan_lru_gen_evict
>>
>> Each event is similar to the following legacy events.
>> trace_mm_vmscan_lru_isolate,
>> trace_mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_[in]active
>>
>> Here's an example
>> mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan: isolate_mode=0 classzone=1 order=9 nr_requested=4096 nr_scanned=431 nr_skipped=0 nr_taken=55 lru=anon
>> mm_vmscan_lru_gen_evict: nid=0 nr_reclaimed=42 nr_dirty=0 nr_writeback=0 nr_congested=0 nr_immediate=0 nr_activate_anon=13 nr_activate_file=0 nr_ref_keep=0 nr_unmap_fail=0 priority=2 flags=RECLAIM_WB_ANON|RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC
>> mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan: isolate_mode=0 classzone=1 order=9 nr_requested=4096 nr_scanned=66 nr_skipped=0 nr_taken=64 lru=file
>> mm_vmscan_lru_gen_evict: nid=0 nr_reclaimed=62 nr_dirty=0 nr_writeback=0 nr_congested=0 nr_immediate=0 nr_activate_anon=0 nr_activate_file=2 nr_ref_keep=0 nr_unmap_fail=0 priority=2 flags=RECLAIM_WB_FILE|RECLAIM_WB_ASYNC
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jaewon Kim <jaewon31.kim@...sung.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>> Reviewed-by: T.J. Mercier <tjmercier@...gle.com>
>> ---
>> v3: change printk format
>> v2: use condition and make it aligned
>> v1: introduce trace events
>> ---
>> include/trace/events/mmflags.h | 5 ++
>> include/trace/events/vmscan.h | 98 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> mm/vmscan.c | 17 ++++--
>> 3 files changed, 115 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
>> index 1478b9dd05fa..44e9b38f83e7 100644
>> --- a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
>> +++ b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
>> @@ -274,6 +274,10 @@ IF_HAVE_VM_SOFTDIRTY(VM_SOFTDIRTY, "softdirty" ) \
>> EM (LRU_ACTIVE_FILE, "active_file") \
>> EMe(LRU_UNEVICTABLE, "unevictable")
>>
>> +#define LRU_GEN_NAMES \
>> + EM (LRU_GEN_ANON, "anon") \
>> + EMe(LRU_GEN_FILE, "file")
>> +
>
>I found this patchset makes build fails when !CONFIG_LRU_GEN, like below:
>
> In file included from /linux/include/trace/trace_events.h:27,
> from /linux/include/trace/define_trace.h:102,
> from /linux/include/trace/events/oom.h:195,
> from /linux/mm/oom_kill.c:53:
> /linux/include/trace/events/mmflags.h:278:7: error: ‘LRU_GEN_ANON’ undeclared here (not in a function); did you mean ‘LRU_GEN_PGOFF’?
> 278 | EM (LRU_GEN_ANON, "anon") \
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>Maybe some config checks are needed?
Sorry and thank you for your comment.
I think I need to wrap with CONFIG_LRU_GEN
Adding #ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN even to vmscan.c seems not nice though.
Additionally I had to remove isolate_mode to be compatible with
mm, vmscan: remove ISOLATE_UNMAPPED
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20230914131637.12204-4-vbabka@suse.cz/
Here's what I changed on top of this v3 patch.
I'm trying to find a way not to use ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN in vmscan.c
--- a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
@@ -274,9 +274,11 @@ IF_HAVE_VM_SOFTDIRTY(VM_SOFTDIRTY, "softdirty" ) \
EM (LRU_ACTIVE_FILE, "active_file") \
EMe(LRU_UNEVICTABLE, "unevictable")
+#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
#define LRU_GEN_NAMES \
EM (LRU_GEN_ANON, "anon") \
EMe(LRU_GEN_FILE, "file")
+#endif
/*
* First define the enums in the above macros to be exported to userspace
@@ -292,7 +294,9 @@ COMPACTION_PRIORITY
/* COMPACTION_FEEDBACK are defines not enums. Not needed here. */
ZONE_TYPE
LRU_NAMES
+#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
LRU_GEN_NAMES
+#endif
/*
* Now redefine the EM() and EMe() macros to map the enums to the strings
diff --git a/include/trace/events/vmscan.h b/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
index e7230fa8bda1..ba99182d6558 100644
--- a/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/vmscan.h
@@ -323,6 +323,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_isolate,
__print_symbolic(__entry->lru, LRU_NAMES))
);
+#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
TRACE_EVENT_CONDITION(mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan,
TP_PROTO(int highest_zoneidx,
int order,
@@ -330,10 +331,9 @@ TRACE_EVENT_CONDITION(mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan,
unsigned long nr_scanned,
unsigned long nr_skipped,
unsigned long nr_taken,
- isolate_mode_t isolate_mode,
int lru),
- TP_ARGS(highest_zoneidx, order, nr_requested, nr_scanned, nr_skipped, nr_taken, isolate_mode, lru),
+ TP_ARGS(highest_zoneidx, order, nr_requested, nr_scanned, nr_skipped, nr_taken, lru),
TP_CONDITION(nr_scanned),
@@ -344,7 +344,6 @@ TRACE_EVENT_CONDITION(mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan,
__field(unsigned long, nr_scanned)
__field(unsigned long, nr_skipped)
__field(unsigned long, nr_taken)
- __field(unsigned int, isolate_mode)
__field(int, lru)
),
@@ -355,7 +354,6 @@ TRACE_EVENT_CONDITION(mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan,
__entry->nr_scanned = nr_scanned;
__entry->nr_skipped = nr_skipped;
__entry->nr_taken = nr_taken;
- __entry->isolate_mode = (__force unsigned int)isolate_mode;
__entry->lru = lru;
),
@@ -363,7 +361,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT_CONDITION(mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan,
* classzone is previous name of the highest_zoneidx.
* Reason not to change it is the ABI requirement of the tracepoint.
*/
- TP_printk("isolate_mode=%u classzone=%d order=%d nr_requested=%lu nr_scanned=%lu nr_skipped=%lu nr_taken=%lu lru=%s",
+ TP_printk("classzone=%d order=%d nr_requested=%lu nr_scanned=%lu nr_skipped=%lu nr_taken=%lu lru=%s",
__entry->isolate_mode,
__entry->highest_zoneidx,
__entry->order,
@@ -373,6 +371,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT_CONDITION(mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan,
__entry->nr_taken,
__print_symbolic(__entry->lru, LRU_GEN_NAMES))
);
+#endif
TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_write_folio,
@@ -484,6 +483,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_shrink_active,
show_reclaim_flags(__entry->reclaim_flags))
);
+#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_gen_evict,
TP_PROTO(int nid, unsigned long nr_reclaimed,
@@ -530,6 +530,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_lru_gen_evict,
__entry->priority,
show_reclaim_flags(__entry->reclaim_flags))
);
+#endif
TRACE_EVENT(mm_vmscan_node_reclaim_begin,
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index dbfacf79b42c..d26e1d2610ca 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -4390,9 +4390,10 @@ static int scan_folios(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc,
__count_memcg_events(memcg, PGREFILL, sorted);
__count_vm_events(PGSCAN_ANON + type, isolated);
+#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
trace_mm_vmscan_lru_gen_scan(sc->reclaim_idx, sc->order, MAX_LRU_BATCH,
- scanned, skipped, isolated,
- sc->may_unmap ? 0 : ISOLATE_UNMAPPED, type);
+ scanned, skipped, isolated, type);
+#endif
/*
* There might not be eligible folios due to reclaim_idx. Check the
* remaining to prevent livelock if it's not making progress.
@@ -4522,8 +4523,10 @@ static int evict_folios(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc, int swap
retry:
reclaimed = shrink_folio_list(&list, pgdat, sc, &stat, false);
sc->nr_reclaimed += reclaimed;
+#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
trace_mm_vmscan_lru_gen_evict(pgdat->node_id, reclaimed, &stat,
sc->priority, type);
+#endif
list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(folio, next, &list, lru) {
if (!folio_evictable(folio)) {
Thank you
>
>
>Thanks,
>SJ
Powered by blists - more mailing lists