Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <0ca2f22a-8247-8419-3f99-4456a4c7344a@suse.cz>
Date:   Mon, 1 Aug 2022 15:36:48 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.11.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/15] mm/slab_common: fold kmalloc_order_trace() into
 kmalloc_large()
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
Cc:     Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Vasily Averin <vasily.averin@linux.dev>,
        Matthew WilCox <willy@infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
References: <20220712133946.307181-1-42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
 <20220712133946.307181-7-42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
 <2e252179-0ffe-0d9c-9340-77e46f6ffdfd@suse.cz> <YufUgFX2shlG5FoR@hyeyoo>
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <YufUgFX2shlG5FoR@hyeyoo>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 8/1/22 15:26, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 05:23:29PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 7/12/22 15:39, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote:
>> > There is no caller of kmalloc_order_trace() except kmalloc_large().
>> > Fold it into kmalloc_large() and remove kmalloc_order{,_trace}().
>> > 
>> > Also add tracepoint in kmalloc_large() that was previously
>> > in kmalloc_order_trace().
>> > 
>> > Signed-off-by: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
>> > Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
>> 
> 
> Thank you for review.
> 
>> Hmm noticed a small change in how we call trace_kmalloc() which will now
>> include the __GFP_COMP.
> 
> Good catch.
> 
>> I think we could just call alloc_pages() from
>> kmalloc_large() with flags | __GFP_COMP instead of doing flags |=
>> __GFP_COMP; first.
> 
> I'll consider that in next version.
> 
>> AFAICS both kasan_kmalloc_large() and kmemleak_alloc()
>> will filter it out anyway.
> 
> AFAIK not passing __GFP_COMP to both kasan_kmalloc_large()
> and kmemleak_alloc() will affect their behavior.

You mean "will NOT affect...", right?

> - kasan_kmalloc_large() only checks if flag has __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM,
> - kmemleak_alloc() only use it to allocate kmemleak_object from
>   slab/pool, which does not require __GFP_COMP.
> 
> simply calling
> 	alloc_pages() with flags | GFP_COMP
> 	kasan_kmalloc_large() with flags
> 	kmemleak_alloc() with flags
> 	trace_kmalloc() with flags
> will be okay.
> 
> BTW this is fixed after patch 9.

Ah, right. __kmalloc_large_node_notrace() does the same  flags |=
__GFP_COMP; but the tracepoint is outside and unaffected.