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;
Date:   Tue, 2 Aug 2022 11:54:10 +0900
From:   Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
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
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/15] mm/slab_common: fold kmalloc_order_trace() into
 kmalloc_large()
Message-ID: <YuiR0tWqMY+UDU/W@hyeyoo>
References: <20220712133946.307181-1-42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
 <20220712133946.307181-7-42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
 <2e252179-0ffe-0d9c-9340-77e46f6ffdfd@suse.cz>
 <YufUgFX2shlG5FoR@hyeyoo>
 <0ca2f22a-8247-8419-3f99-4456a4c7344a@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0ca2f22a-8247-8419-3f99-4456a4c7344a@suse.cz>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 03:36:48PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> 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?

Ah, yes. mistake.

> 
> > - 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.

I'll reflect your suggestion anyway.

-- 
Thanks,
Hyeonggon