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;
Message-ID: <895c88e8-b1f8-9ce3-8968-1c349c163b63@suse.cz>
Date:   Mon, 25 Oct 2021 10:19:04 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.2.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] slob: add size header to all allocations
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Cc:     Rustam Kovhaev <rkovhaev@gmail.com>, cl@linux.com,
        penberg@kernel.org, rientjes@google.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, djwong@kernel.org, david@fromorbit.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        dvyukov@google.com
References: <20211015005729.GD24333@magnolia>
 <20211018033841.3027515-1-rkovhaev@gmail.com>
 <20211020114638.GA378758@kvm.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal>
 <1dfb7a79-3e66-a9fe-ee7c-1277d7ff5950@suse.cz>
 <20211024104340.GA4370@kvm.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal>
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20211024104340.GA4370@kvm.asia-northeast3-a.c.our-ratio-313919.internal>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 10/24/21 12:43, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> The main reason for this change is to simplify SLOB a little bit, make
>> >> it a bit easier to debug whenever something goes wrong.
>> >>
>> > 
>> > It seems acceptable But I wonder it is worth to increase memory usage
>> > to allow freeing kmem_cache_alloc-ed objects by kfree()?
>> 
>> Not for the reason above, but for providing a useful API guarantee
>> regardless of selected slab allocator IMHO yes.
>> 
> 
> Mm.. that means some callers free kmem_cache_alloc-ed object using
> kfree, and SLAB/SLUB already support that, and SLOB doesn't.

Exactly. Finding that out started this whole thread.

> In what situations is freeing using kfree needed?
> Wouldn't this make code confusing?

XFS seems to have good reasons - at some common freeing place objects can
appears from multiple caches, and it would be expensive to track their cache
just to free them. See
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210930044202.GP2361455@dread.disaster.area/

IMHO it really makes sense to support this from API point of view.
kmem_cache_alloc() is basically a more specific version of the generic
kmalloc(). It makes sense if the generic kind of free, that is kfree() works
on those objects too.

>> > Thanks,
>> > Hyeonggon
>> > 
>> >> meminfo right after the system boot, without the patch:
>> >> Slab:              35500 kB
>> >> 
>> >> the same, with the patch:
>> >> Slab:              36396 kB
>> >> 
>> > 
>> 
>