[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240215180742.34470209@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 18:07:42 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Suren Baghdasaryan
<surenb@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hannes@...xchg.org, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
mgorman@...e.de, dave@...olabs.net, willy@...radead.org,
liam.howlett@...cle.com, corbet@....net, void@...ifault.com,
peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, catalin.marinas@....com,
will@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, peterx@...hat.com,
david@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, mcgrof@...nel.org, masahiroy@...nel.org,
nathan@...nel.org, dennis@...nel.org, tj@...nel.org, muchun.song@...ux.dev,
rppt@...nel.org, paulmck@...nel.org, pasha.tatashin@...een.com,
yosryahmed@...gle.com, yuzhao@...gle.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
hughd@...gle.com, andreyknvl@...il.com, keescook@...omium.org,
ndesaulniers@...gle.com, vvvvvv@...gle.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
ebiggers@...gle.com, ytcoode@...il.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, bsegall@...gle.com, bristot@...hat.com,
vschneid@...hat.com, cl@...ux.com, penberg@...nel.org,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, 42.hyeyoo@...il.com, glider@...gle.com,
elver@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
songmuchun@...edance.com, jbaron@...mai.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
minchan@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com, kernel-team@...roid.com,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
iommu@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 31/35] lib: add memory allocations report in
show_mem()
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 15:33:30 -0500
Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
> > Well, I think without __GFP_NOWARN it will cause a warning and thus
> > recursion into __show_mem(), potentially infinite? Which is of course
> > trivial to fix, but I'd myself rather sacrifice a bit of memory to get
> > this potentially very useful output, if I enabled the profiling. The
> > necessary memory overhead of page_ext and slabobj_ext makes the
> > printing buffer overhead negligible in comparison?
>
> __GFP_NOWARN is a good point, we should have that.
>
> But - and correct me if I'm wrong here - doesn't an OOM kick in well
> before GFP_ATOMIC 4k allocations are failing? I'd expect the system to
> be well and truly hosed at that point.
>
> If we want this report to be 100% reliable, then yes the preallocated
> buffer makes sense - but I don't think 100% makes sense here; I think we
> can accept ~99% and give back that 4k.
I just compiled v6.8-rc4 vanilla (with a fedora localmodconfig build) and
saved it off (vmlinux.orig), then I compiled with the following:
Applied the patches but did not enable anything: vmlinux.memtag-off
Enabled MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING: vmlinux.memtag
Enabled MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING_ENABLED_BY_DEFAULT: vmlinux.memtag-default-on
Enabled MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING_DEBUG: vmlinux.memtag-debug
And here's what I got:
text data bss dec hex filename
29161847 18352730 5619716 53134293 32ac3d5 vmlinux.orig
29162286 18382638 5595140 53140064 32ada60 vmlinux.memtag-off (+5771)
29230868 18887662 5275652 53394182 32ebb06 vmlinux.memtag (+259889)
29230746 18887662 5275652 53394060 32eba8c vmlinux.memtag-default-on (+259767) dropped?
29276214 18946374 5177348 53399936 32ed180 vmlinux.memtag-debug (+265643)
Just adding the patches increases the size by 5k. But the rest shows an
increase of 259k, and you are worried about 4k (and possibly less?)???
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists