From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-183.mta0.migadu.com (out-183.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8663536308D for ; Sun, 17 May 2026 19:39:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.183 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779046752; cv=none; b=HbFkSHB2u38BZWPB66skAADg3qAi/R5/N5u5SNfAYpAHxwxhHx04hbuXaBaVqpZJGZXGQyMpFYruHqevX4sjr3B0NwrvI2m31RZLBrEmTVmxJkS8XnmyJZJi8EcA843ZOddcDEjHypW/5e68oP0PIvRiVX7z+01dGjvx6n7uczk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779046752; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4q+ggM690tgwgZRb/GGTvagzzCpOF5q1ZjJ7P1xxi3E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=T2jYvQFKGLSWFL/NOKhthp7x8W5iy/UE4exS9xe1JsKq55+L99C0ofaL0WjMCd1+ct0iH8dSfisp8XTqDPcf/eVVPwx29oO34kygYutyAxxDKu8bqFe/QJEtUu7xCCdgXBag0X5EF/VsA2ExcZHAc+7GnVceuCFL1R690FShbec= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=KvufxR/3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.183 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="KvufxR/3" Date: Sun, 17 May 2026 12:38:48 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1779046737; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=vkkU2txQqya1KzbYt5PMEvI3vCZlClG1M28QDAsLkFw=; b=KvufxR/304uZuZv6UxWYGC+8bRKN236iAvZRN9h4jixNisdBoosVkl6EOB9hUTACy4mz7q rPUaLmVozzx7+BvKWCNjmAJqyih51pF+mIvC23rNvHO4gq+cnSOG416J1cpCWIVuB1rv5H owXLIB+F8rXR3/xK/mu0a08FPaTuc4I= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Shakeel Butt To: Oliver Sang Cc: Qi Zheng , oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , David Carlier , Allen Pais , Axel Rasmussen , Baoquan He , Chengming Zhou , Chen Ridong , David Hildenbrand , Hamza Mahfooz , Harry Yoo , Hugh Dickins , Imran Khan , Johannes Weiner , Kamalesh Babulal , Lance Yang , Liam Howlett , Lorenzo Stoakes , Michal Hocko , Michal =?utf-8?Q?Koutn=C3=BD?= , Mike Rapoport , Muchun Song , Muchun Song , Nhat Pham , Roman Gushchin , Suren Baghdasaryan , Usama Arif , Vlastimil Babka , Wei Xu , Yosry Ahmed , Yuanchu Xie , Zi Yan , Usama Arif , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [linus:master] [mm] 01b9da291c: stress-ng.switch.ops_per_sec 67.7% regression Message-ID: References: <202605121641.b6a60cb0-lkp@intel.com> <0e1b8994-944d-4dda-8966-3cd43661796d@linux.dev> <46e9f5cf-34cb-466d-a53a-5778768af4d9@linux.dev> <93b7c3f206f158e7387cbb5f0bf5845b59b93053@linux.dev> <19693be6-7132-446e-b3fc-b7e9f56e5949@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cgroups@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Sun, May 17, 2026 at 08:55:50PM +0800, Oliver Sang wrote: > hi, Shakeel, hi, Qi, > > On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 10:09:06AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 03:37:22PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote: > > > Hi Shakeel, > > > > > > On 5/14/26 9:40 PM, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > > > May 14, 2026 at 12:46 AM, "Qi Zheng" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/13/26 10:27 PM, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 06:49:45AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 10:10:34AM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/13/26 12:03 AM, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 08:56:52PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > kernel test robot noticed a 67.7% regression of stress-ng.switch.ops_per_sec on: > > > > > > > > > > > > commit: 01b9da291c4969354807b52956f4aae1f41b4924 ("mm: memcontrol: convert objcg to be per-memcg per-node type") > > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master > > > > > > > > > > > > This is most probably due to shuffling of struct mem_cgroup and struct > > > > > > mem_cgroup_per_node members. > > > > > > > > > > > > Another possibility is that after objcg was split into per-node, the > > > > > > slab accounting fast path is still designed assuming only one current > > > > > > objcg per CPU: > > > > > > > > > > > > struct obj_stock_pcp { > > > > > > struct obj_cgroup *cached_objcg; > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > > > So it's may cause the following thrashing: > > > > > > > > > > > > CPU stock cached = memcg/node0 objcg > > > > > > free object tagged = memcg/node1 objcg > > > > > > => __refill_obj_stock --> objcg mismatch > > > > > > => drain_obj_stock() > > > > > > => cache switches to node1 objcg > > > > > > > > > > > > next local allocation tagged = node0 objcg > > > > > > => mismatch again > > > > > > => drain_obj_stock() > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually I think this is the issue, we have ping pong threads running on > > > > > > > different nodes where though theu are in same cgroup but their current->obcg is > > > > > > > for local node and thus this ping pong is thrashing the per-cpu objcg stock. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The easier fix would be to compare objcg->memcg instead of just objcg during > > > > > > > draining and caching. In addition we can add support for multiple objcg per-cpu > > > > > > > stock caching. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Something like the following: > > > > > > From d756abe831a905d6fe32bad9a984fc619dafb7e0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > > > > From: Shakeel Butt > > > > > > Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 07:24:55 -0700 > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH] mm/memcontrol: skip obj_stock drain when refilled objcg > > > > > > shares memcg > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt > > > > > > --- > > > > > > mm/memcontrol.c | 14 +++++++++++++- > > > > > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > > > > > > index d978e18b9b2d..01ed7a8e18ac 100644 > > > > > > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > > > > > > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > > > > > > @@ -3318,6 +3318,7 @@ static void __refill_obj_stock(struct obj_cgroup *objcg, > > > > > > unsigned int nr_bytes, > > > > > > bool allow_uncharge) > > > > > > { > > > > > > + struct obj_cgroup *cached; > > > > > > unsigned int nr_pages = 0; > > > > > > > if (!stock) { > > > > > > @@ -3327,7 +3328,18 @@ static void __refill_obj_stock(struct obj_cgroup *objcg, > > > > > > goto out; > > > > > > } > > > > > > > - if (READ_ONCE(stock->cached_objcg) != objcg) { /* reset if necessary */ > > > > > > + cached = READ_ONCE(stock->cached_objcg); > > > > > > + if (cached != objcg && > > > > > > + (!cached || obj_cgroup_memcg(cached) != obj_cgroup_memcg(objcg))) { > > > > > > drain_obj_stock(stock); > > > > > > obj_cgroup_get(objcg); > > > > > > stock->nr_bytes = atomic_read(&objcg->nr_charged_bytes) > > > > > > > > > > > This change looks like it should be able to fix the ping-pong issue, but > > > > > I stiil haven't reproduced the performance regression locally. I'll > > > > > continue testing it. > > > > > > > > Same here, couldn't reproduce locally. It seems like we had to craft a scenario > > > > where the pair pingpong threads get their current->objcg from different nodes. > > > > I will try that. > > > > > > I still haven't been able to reproduce the LKP results locally, but I > > > used an AI bot to generate a pingpong test case (pasted at the end) and > > > automatically ran the test on a physical machine. The results are as > > > follows: > > > > > > parent: 8285917d6f > > > bad: 01b9da291c > > > fix: 01b9da291c + stock patch > > > > > > | kernel | mq_ops/sec mean | vs parent | drain_obj_stock / round | > > > |--------|-----------------|-----------|-------------------------| > > > | parent | 9.743M | baseline | ~0 | > > > | bad | 7.821M | -19.73% | ~11.16M | > > > | fix | 9.274M | -4.81% | ~0 | > > > > > > Probing the drain_obj_stock() calls confirms that the fix restores the > > > frequency to the parent's baseline. > > > > > > And it seems that besides __refill_obj_stock(), we should also modify > > > __consume_obj_stock()? > > > > > > > Thanks a lot Qi. I will send the formal patch and will add your Debugged-by if > > you don't mind. > > > > Tested-by: kernel test robot > > we tested above patch, and it recovers the regression: > > ========================================================================================= > compiler/cpufreq_governor/kconfig/method/nr_threads/rootfs/tbox_group/test/testcase/testtime: > gcc-14/performance/x86_64-rhel-9.4/mq/100%/debian-13-x86_64-20250902.cgz/lkp-spr-r02/switch/stress-ng/60s > > commit: > 8285917d6f ("mm: memcontrol: prepare for reparenting non-hierarchical stats") > 01b9da291c ("mm: memcontrol: convert objcg to be per-memcg per-node type") > 682fd4e9ff <--- above patch from Shakeel > > 8285917d6f383aef 01b9da291c4969354807b52956f 682fd4e9ffd4009805f81dd25ed > ---------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- > %stddev %change %stddev %change %stddev > \ | \ | \ > 5849 +210.2% 18145 ± 3% +1.5% 5935 stress-ng.switch.nanosecs_per_context_switch_mq_method > 2.296e+09 -67.7% 7.408e+08 ± 3% -1.4% 2.263e+09 stress-ng.switch.ops > 38288993 -67.7% 12355813 ± 3% -1.4% 37739220 stress-ng.switch.ops_per_sec > > > full compasison is as below [3] > > but there are two notes. > > #1 is that we noticed there is a fomal patch later from Shakeel in [1] which has > more changes. not sure if this test is enough? do you want us to test [1] > further? Thanks Oliver, I will send a v2 soon, please test v2. > > #2: when we test above patch, we found the server easy to crash while running > tests. we try to run up to 20 times, only 2 of them run successfully (above > 37739220 is just the average data from these 2 runs, since the data is stable, > we think maybe it's ok to report to you with this data). > we also noticed for [1] there is a [syzbot ci] report in [2]. since we don't > have serial output for our test server in this report which is for performance > tests, we cannot say if other 18 runs failed due to similar reason. just FYI. > The syzbot report is simply a rcu warning which will be fixed in v2. Do you have more details on the crash you are seeing? Is it page counter underflow warning? Thanks again for the help.