Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755921AbbKCSu5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2015 13:50:57 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:57557 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755429AbbKCSuz (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2015 13:50:55 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 18:50:50 +0000 From: Catalin Marinas To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Robert Richter , Linux-sh list , Will Deacon , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Robert Richter , Tirumalesh Chalamarla , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Joonsoo Kim , Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Increase the max granular size Message-ID: <20151103185050.GJ7637@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1442944788-17254-1-git-send-email-rric@kernel.org> <20151028190948.GJ8899@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20151103120504.GF7637@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20151103143858.GI7637@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3596 Lines: 86 On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 03:55:29PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 12:05:05PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > >> On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 12:07:06PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Catalin Marinas > >> > wrote: > >> > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 07:59:48PM +0200, Robert Richter wrote: > >> > >> From: Tirumalesh Chalamarla > >> > >> > >> > >> Increase the standard cacheline size to avoid having locks in the same > >> > >> cacheline. > >> > >> > >> > >> Cavium's ThunderX core implements cache lines of 128 byte size. With > >> > >> current granulare size of 64 bytes (L1_CACHE_SHIFT=6) two locks could > >> > >> share the same cache line leading a performance degradation. > >> > >> Increasing the size fixes that. > >> > >> > >> > >> Increasing the size has no negative impact to cache invalidation on > >> > >> systems with a smaller cache line. There is an impact on memory usage, > >> > >> but that's not too important for arm64 use cases. > >> > >> > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Tirumalesh Chalamarla > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Robert Richter > >> > > > >> > > Applied. Thanks. > >> > > >> > This patch causes a BUG() on r8a7795/salvator-x, for which support is not > >> > yet upstream. > >> > > >> > My config (attached) uses SLAB. If I switch to SLUB, it works. > >> > The arm64 defconfig works, even if I switch from SLUB to SLAB. > >> [...] > >> > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > >> > kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:2283! > >> > Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] SMP > >> [...] > >> > Call trace: > >> > [] __kmem_cache_create+0x21c/0x280 > >> > [] create_boot_cache+0x4c/0x80 > >> > [] create_kmalloc_cache+0x54/0x88 > >> > [] create_kmalloc_caches+0x50/0xf4 > >> > [] kmem_cache_init+0x104/0x118 > >> > [] start_kernel+0x218/0x33c > >> > >> I haven't managed to reproduce this on a Juno kernel. > > > > I now managed to reproduce it with your config (slightly adapted to > > allow Juno). I'll look into it. > > Good to hear that! > > BTW, I see this: > > freelist_size = 32 > cache_line_size() = 64 > > It seems like the value returned by cache_line_size() in > arch/arm64/include/asm/cache.h disagrees with L1_CACHE_SHIFT == 7: > > static inline int cache_line_size(void) > { > u32 cwg = cache_type_cwg(); > return cwg ? 4 << cwg : L1_CACHE_BYTES; > } > > Making cache_line_size() always return L1_CACHE_BYTES doesn't help. (cc'ing Jonsoo and Christoph; summary: slab failure with L1_CACHE_BYTES of 128 and sizeof(kmem_cache_node) of 152) If I revert commit 8fc9cf420b36 ("slab: make more slab management structure off the slab") it works but I still need to figure out how slab indices are calculated. The size_index[] array is overridden so that 0..15 are 7 and 16..23 are 8. But the kmalloc_caches[7] has never been populated, hence the BUG_ON. Another option may be to change kmalloc_size and kmalloc_index to cope with KMALLOC_MIN_SIZE of 128. I'll do some more investigation tomorrow. -- Catalin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/