Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 13:27:36 +0000
From: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, oliver.upton@...ux.dev,
	maz@...nel.org, james.morse@....com, suzuki.poulose@....com,
	yuzenghui@...wei.com, arnd@...db.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
	bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com, mhiramat@...nel.org,
	rppt@...nel.org, hughd@...gle.com, pcc@...gle.com,
	steven.price@....com, vincenzo.frascino@....com, david@...hat.com,
	eugenis@...gle.com, kcc@...gle.com, hyesoo.yu@...sung.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 06/35] mm: cma: Make CMA_ALLOC_SUCCESS/FAIL count
 the number of pages

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 10:10:05AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1/30/24 17:28, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 10:22:11AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> >>
> >> On 1/29/24 17:21, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 02:54:20PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 1/25/24 22:12, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
> >>>>> The CMA_ALLOC_SUCCESS, respectively CMA_ALLOC_FAIL, are increased by one
> >>>>> after each cma_alloc() function call. This is done even though cma_alloc()
> >>>>> can allocate an arbitrary number of CMA pages. When looking at
> >>>>> /proc/vmstat, the number of successful (or failed) cma_alloc() calls
> >>>>> doesn't tell much with regards to how many CMA pages were allocated via
> >>>>> cma_alloc() versus via the page allocator (regular allocation request or
> >>>>> PCP lists refill).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This can also be rather confusing to a user who isn't familiar with the
> >>>>> code, since the unit of measurement for nr_free_cma is the number of pages,
> >>>>> but cma_alloc_success and cma_alloc_fail count the number of cma_alloc()
> >>>>> function calls.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Let's make this consistent, and arguably more useful, by having
> >>>>> CMA_ALLOC_SUCCESS count the number of successfully allocated CMA pages, and
> >>>>> CMA_ALLOC_FAIL count the number of pages the cma_alloc() failed to
> >>>>> allocate.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For users that wish to track the number of cma_alloc() calls, there are
> >>>>> tracepoints for that already implemented.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@....com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>  mm/cma.c | 4 ++--
> >>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/mm/cma.c b/mm/cma.c
> >>>>> index f49c95f8ee37..dbf7fe8cb1bd 100644
> >>>>> --- a/mm/cma.c
> >>>>> +++ b/mm/cma.c
> >>>>> @@ -517,10 +517,10 @@ struct page *cma_alloc(struct cma *cma, unsigned long count,
> >>>>>  	pr_debug("%s(): returned %p\n", __func__, page);
> >>>>>  out:
> >>>>>  	if (page) {
> >>>>> -		count_vm_event(CMA_ALLOC_SUCCESS);
> >>>>> +		count_vm_events(CMA_ALLOC_SUCCESS, count);
> >>>>>  		cma_sysfs_account_success_pages(cma, count);
> >>>>>  	} else {
> >>>>> -		count_vm_event(CMA_ALLOC_FAIL);
> >>>>> +		count_vm_events(CMA_ALLOC_FAIL, count);
> >>>>>  		if (cma)
> >>>>>  			cma_sysfs_account_fail_pages(cma, count);
> >>>>>  	}
> >>>> Without getting into the merits of this patch - which is actually trying to do
> >>>> semantics change to /proc/vmstat, wondering how is this even related to this
> >>>> particular series ? If required this could be debated on it's on separately.
> >>> Having the number of CMA pages allocated and the number of CMA pages freed
> >>> allows someone to infer how many tagged pages are in use at a given time:
> >> That should not be done in CMA which is a generic multi purpose allocator.
> 
> > Ah, ok. Let me rephrase that: Having the number of CMA pages allocated, the
> > number of failed CMA page allocations and the number of freed CMA pages
> > allows someone to infer how many CMA pages are in use at a given time.
> > That's valuable information for software designers and system
> > administrators, as it allows them to tune the number of CMA pages available
> > in a system.
> > 
> > Or put another way: what would you consider to be more useful?  Knowing the
> > number of cma_alloc()/cma_release() calls, or knowing the number of pages
> > that cma_alloc()/cma_release() allocated or freed?
> 
> There is still value in knowing how many times cma_alloc() succeeded or failed
> regardless of the cumulative number pages involved over the time. Actually the
> count helps to understand how cma_alloc() performed overall as an allocator.
> 
> But on the cma_release() path there is no chances of failure apart from - just
> when the caller itself provides an wrong input. So there are no corresponding
> CMA_RELEASE_SUCCESS/CMA_RELEASE_FAIL vmstat counters in there - for a reason !
> 
> Coming back to CMA based pages being allocated and freed, there is already an
> interface via sysfs (CONFIG_CMA_SYSFS) which gets updated in cma_alloc() path
> via cma_sysfs_account_success_pages() and cma_sysfs_account_fail_pages().
> 
> #ls /sys/kernel/mm/cma/<name>
> alloc_pages_fail alloc_pages_success
> 
> Why these counters could not meet your requirements ? Also 'struct cma' can
> be updated to add an element 'nr_pages_freed' to be tracked in cma_release(),
> providing free pages count as well.
> 
> There are additional debug fs based elements (CONFIG_CMA_DEBUGFS) available.
> 
> #ls /sys/kernel/debug/cma/<name>
> alloc  base_pfn  bitmap  count  free  maxchunk  order_per_bit  used

Ok, I'll have a look at those, thank you for the suggestion.

Thanks,
Alex

Powered by blists - more mailing lists