Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: O166hFl/kUUCS2stThOFXVSw6unJMOC3/77W9R3kUjp/BSPJ10ib3NA17O1H6Lb1AtOuv/GJ+Y
 1lR6gvyLhizA==
From:   SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
CC:     SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        <sj38.park@gmail.com>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>, <snu@amazon.com>,
        <amit@kernel.org>, <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH net v2 0/2] Revert the 'socket_alloc' life cycle change
Date:   Tue, 5 May 2020 17:46:44 +0200
Message-ID: <20200505154644.18997-1-sjpark@amazon.com>
In-Reply-To: <a8510327-d4f0-1207-1342-d688e9d5b8c3@gmail.com> (raw)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 5 May 2020 08:20:50 -0700 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 5/5/20 8:07 AM, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > On Tue, 5 May 2020 07:53:39 -0700 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
> > 
> 
> >> Why do we have 10,000,000 objects around ? Could this be because of
> >> some RCU problem ?
> > 
> > Mainly because of a long RCU grace period, as you guess.  I have no idea how
> > the grace period became so long in this case.
> > 
> > As my test machine was a virtual machine instance, I guess RCU readers
> > preemption[1] like problem might affected this.
> > 
> > [1] https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc17/atc17-prasad.pdf
> > 
> >>
> >> Once Al patches reverted, do you have 10,000,000 sock_alloc around ?
> > 
> > Yes, both the old kernel that prior to Al's patches and the recent kernel
> > reverting the Al's patches didn't reproduce the problem.
> >
> 
> I repeat my question : Do you have 10,000,000 (smaller) objects kept in slab caches ?
> 
> TCP sockets use the (very complex, error prone) SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU, but not the struct socket_wq
> object that was allocated in sock_alloc_inode() before Al patches.
> 
> These objects should be visible in kmalloc-64 kmem cache.

Not exactly the 10,000,000, as it is only the possible highest number, but I
was able to observe clear exponential increase of the number of the objects
using slabtop.  Before the start of the problematic workload, the number of
objects of 'kmalloc-64' was 5760, but I was able to observe the number increase
to 1,136,576.

	  OBJS ACTIVE  USE OBJ SIZE  SLABS OBJ/SLAB CACHE SIZE NAME
before:	  5760   5088  88%    0.06K     90       64       360K kmalloc-64
after:	1136576 1136576 100%    0.06K  17759       64     71036K kmalloc-64


Thanks,
SeongJae Park