Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-85507-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240221194052.927623-1-surenb@google.com> <20240221194052.927623-15-surenb@google.com>
 <b62d2ace-4619-40ac-8536-c5626e95d87b@suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <b62d2ace-4619-40ac-8536-c5626e95d87b@suse.cz>
From: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 18:07:18 +0000
Message-ID: <CAJuCfpEsBEK5M72v1MdSBnh_bFgJLRj3JzDdz1X1BGzfJw6sfw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/36] lib: add allocation tagging support for memory
 allocation profiling
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, kent.overstreet@linux.dev, mhocko@suse.com, 
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, mgorman@suse.de, 
	dave@stgolabs.net, willy@infradead.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com, 
	penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp, corbet@lwn.net, void@manifault.com, 
	peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, 
	will@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, 
	dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, peterx@redhat.com, 
	david@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, mcgrof@kernel.org, masahiroy@kernel.org, 
	nathan@kernel.org, dennis@kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev, 
	rppt@kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, 
	yosryahmed@google.com, yuzhao@google.com, dhowells@redhat.com, 
	hughd@google.com, andreyknvl@gmail.com, keescook@chromium.org, 
	ndesaulniers@google.com, vvvvvv@google.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, 
	ebiggers@google.com, ytcoode@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, 
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, 
	bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org, 
	iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, 42.hyeyoo@gmail.com, glider@google.com, 
	elver@google.com, dvyukov@google.com, shakeelb@google.com, 
	songmuchun@bytedance.com, jbaron@akamai.com, rientjes@google.com, 
	minchan@google.com, kaleshsingh@google.com, kernel-team@android.com, 
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, 
	linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, 
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 8:41=E2=80=AFAM Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> wr=
ote:
>
> Another thing I noticed, dunno how critical
>
> On 2/21/24 20:40, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > +static inline void __alloc_tag_sub(union codetag_ref *ref, size_t byte=
s)
> > +{
> > +     struct alloc_tag *tag;
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING_DEBUG
> > +     WARN_ONCE(ref && !ref->ct, "alloc_tag was not set\n");
> > +#endif
> > +     if (!ref || !ref->ct)
> > +             return;
>
> This is quite careful.
>
> > +
> > +     tag =3D ct_to_alloc_tag(ref->ct);
> > +
> > +     this_cpu_sub(tag->counters->bytes, bytes);
> > +     this_cpu_dec(tag->counters->calls);
> > +
> > +     ref->ct =3D NULL;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void alloc_tag_sub(union codetag_ref *ref, size_t bytes)
> > +{
> > +     __alloc_tag_sub(ref, bytes);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void alloc_tag_sub_noalloc(union codetag_ref *ref, size_=
t bytes)
> > +{
> > +     __alloc_tag_sub(ref, bytes);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void alloc_tag_ref_set(union codetag_ref *ref, struct al=
loc_tag *tag)
> > +{
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING_DEBUG
> > +     WARN_ONCE(ref && ref->ct,
> > +               "alloc_tag was not cleared (got tag for %s:%u)\n",\
> > +               ref->ct->filename, ref->ct->lineno);
> > +
> > +     WARN_ONCE(!tag, "current->alloc_tag not set");
> > +#endif
> > +     if (!ref || !tag)
> > +             return;
>
> This too.
>
> > +
> > +     ref->ct =3D &tag->ct;
> > +     /*
> > +      * We need in increment the call counter every time we have a new
> > +      * allocation or when we split a large allocation into smaller on=
es.
> > +      * Each new reference for every sub-allocation needs to increment=
 call
> > +      * counter because when we free each part the counter will be dec=
remented.
> > +      */
> > +     this_cpu_inc(tag->counters->calls);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void alloc_tag_add(union codetag_ref *ref, struct alloc_=
tag *tag, size_t bytes)
> > +{
> > +     alloc_tag_ref_set(ref, tag);
>
> We might have returned from alloc_tag_ref_set() due to !tag
>
> > +     this_cpu_add(tag->counters->bytes, bytes);
>
> But here we still assume it's valid.

Yes, this is a blunder on my side after splitting alloc_tag_ref_set()
into a separate function. I'll fix this in the next version. Thanks!

>
> > +}
> > +
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an=
 email to kernel-team+unsubscribe@android.com.
>