Re: [Intel-wired-lan] Increased memory usage on NUMA nodes with ICE driver after upgrade to 6.13.y (regression in commit 492a044508ad)

[Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2175 bytes --]



On 6/30/2025 2:56 PM, Jacob Keller wrote:
> Unfortunately it looks like the fix I mentioned has landed in 6.14, so
> its not a fix for your issue (since you mentioned 6.14 has failed
> testing in your system)
> 
> $ git describe --first-parent --contains --match=v* --exclude=*rc*
> 743bbd93cf29f653fae0e1416a31f03231689911
> v6.14~251^2~15^2~2
> 
> I don't see any other relevant changes since v6.14. I can try to see if
> I see similar issues with CONFIG_MEM_ALLOC_PROFILING on some test
> systems here.

On my system I see this at boot after loading the ice module from

$ grep -F "/ice/" /proc/allocinfo | sort -g | tail | numfmt --to=iec>
      26K      230 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_irq.c:84 [ice]
func:ice_get_irq_res
>          48K        2 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_arfs.c:565 [ice] func:ice_init_arfs
>          57K      226 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c:397 [ice] func:ice_vsi_alloc_ring_stats
>          57K      226 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c:416 [ice] func:ice_vsi_alloc_ring_stats
>          85K      226 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c:1398 [ice] func:ice_vsi_alloc_rings
>         339K      226 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c:1422 [ice] func:ice_vsi_alloc_rings
>         678K      226 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_base.c:109 [ice] func:ice_vsi_alloc_q_vector
>         1.1M      257 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_fwlog.c:40 [ice] func:ice_fwlog_alloc_ring_buffs
>         7.2M      114 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_txrx.c:493 [ice] func:ice_setup_rx_ring
>         896M   229264 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_txrx.c:680 [ice] func:ice_alloc_mapped_page

Its about 1GB for the mapped pages. I don't see any increase moment to
moment. I've started an iperf session to simulate some traffic, and I'll
leave this running to see if anything changes overnight.

Is there anything else that you can share about the traffic setup or
otherwise that I could look into?  Your system seems to use ~2.5 x the
buffer size as mine, but that might just be a smaller number of CPUs.

Hopefully I'll get some more results overnight.

Thanks,
Jake

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]