From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05861C433FE for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 11:37:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To: Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=itNwp1LnjowJHRmevv7mQxjw+S0+tSw0T6eG4OQ94/o=; b=kUoX7vroVE3vp5 XZHs8rRa38luzwM6sUCWHuO3f54br84gihdE2Ei2OGH/qBcD7AfrlfgnOtmgR7Hizu8Ag0/liEgtM xWvxEDhn4cgzDVMiOrIDbf9LNXJ/D093JaI015+XvH1CZzkxsWwiZV1EtnN6Zw581TkH5iMJGtxa2 Tg8jx+oIopYFDNmqVH5r5nV0p1tRhsriKNtu4YqP1gRcAv8I+xwY/h8iidEcK5RkasU5a4QVhp7Uc invZQO4QH8mHqpHLKymxXfFwfq2d2ox/pod++U1w+0RNKfHzlkqTVRbIfExGqXqjVw70dNG9jGGJT n5QYJrfNvMshsWnVa4gg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ouXkj-000QX0-Ie; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 11:35:49 +0000 Received: from esa2.hgst.iphmx.com ([68.232.143.124]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ouXkf-000QUN-C2 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 11:35:47 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=wdc.com; i=@wdc.com; q=dns/txt; s=dkim.wdc.com; t=1668425745; x=1699961745; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WHeLY9a6UKMTiG2de6Vs9bsuLF7tQZ2YgeC6xZyhGac=; b=JVO7mvE32L1Ve1AlWCDMLEoZkoJTZZUYAl35kbH26dunAUUr7sgn3Zfl dIdg94evkfP4k/TXnaTUB0rCR/j00zAdO1Cv1uQTDDuE/GgIDZreZAFIc RtowTdqYHnieJ/bdJnWQpPPcbPK1zMB85r5ynoM4cTYnmMxn4SBEuJXWR +var1H3Jiz83vtjorlSQgmrU3477P2uvmCg5QvYXOXDK6lOr2u3aI7J1T S+OmoU1QiDYuoJ9KAqTKctHGhIfxAmuwh6BnVkTnzGHO6l06XB8JJQ2ur VbpLLa6HvJOhzVexbqxDSsMdrZGJihEJZvpH6alYe8Y4bl7E/FLOuBB3z A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,161,1665417600"; d="scan'208";a="320557317" Received: from h199-255-45-14.hgst.com (HELO uls-op-cesaep01.wdc.com) ([199.255.45.14]) by ob1.hgst.iphmx.com with ESMTP; 14 Nov 2022 19:35:41 +0800 IronPort-SDR: hDjwlrCAq1QNdff79/v7XHpILiRmXr4KiwGHBDXDqu21LRov1jdZDtcw0QoQDVEVfvWPZtCTU6 za5Q0n+GuQfPbMtmt0svUNC64aAsm7uWvelI5lDj3BIDxtkb3eS+OCZSg/lVJUEsen1dLm261c 1Ffdbkr5AIcPSbGfuuvlXgjIlHhJkzlc+NEbvpB8VuufdUi7VbQCKeubjCtAcO75L9yqAX+snm 0E3jFyMGJXtGhLgUrGwgrHix9iDQWVaHvmWEDnZ3dbX9iBNUJ1FDUWVoSZEJhTsqhk5LxUXBw+ IIU= Received: from uls-op-cesaip01.wdc.com ([10.248.3.36]) by uls-op-cesaep01.wdc.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256; 14 Nov 2022 02:54:40 -0800 IronPort-SDR: 4RQiDICjHk4AaZBOeQcJDRu4rcGHPp4MH9nePkq8f+Q44vULQRvp8/+ZAysr//lE70VTuMMqf6 opfjdLpAu/nm5P2loixt/aF0Put/DCA3mp7q8D7f0SnkIClyXW+wXXy+WTwmoQ/X3Z9sarFxY/ 7FVREfkB3E39BBQ5ZwWd122YXK9Eg4RR3/+7zvI7kO0lk8YnlP0DYF44y56K/+SBj1nOA4aZly QdD0SmgDFq7nBJf+jEgnjUOoEV8ucy611o0U4TSkcZJIsNIjvuqeIXcL5YkRqb8LVzr0Gh1jDK HTY= WDCIronportException: Internal Received: from usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com ([10.3.10.180]) by uls-op-cesaip01.wdc.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256; 14 Nov 2022 03:35:42 -0800 Received: from usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com [127.0.0.1]) by usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4N9nLP4g5dz1RvTr for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 03:35:41 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass reason="pass (just generated, assumed good)" header.d=opensource.wdc.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d= opensource.wdc.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :in-reply-to:organization:from:references:to:content-language :subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id; s=dkim; t= 1668425739; x=1671017740; bh=WHeLY9a6UKMTiG2de6Vs9bsuLF7tQZ2YgeC 6xZyhGac=; b=CUuGIPlwf3Bn8/s9EFG5W98t0wfQJthG48+ahxRGQogE6ytTX7G H+g5CYe+ZVHCgL6VjsYt/0d0iUEkeqCWLh4+6FeB/akADAFVY12TlCVYhVGpI+Pi x9cvnAXhvcN5MEd3To/kddt7GRpLgG/anpHt/sI8OgGdQj5RYqCDpLFVVLZ0GB2b 3iDMkXsEtyz2foVR37V1+K7uaM8dgNoiO8osoGLrGKCC2E1ZM2tVLuVJwokC6IuH 8U4zmnmlZ3kcdtp6s9LT0xKpS2gfTE+XImzeKORyTOIFRXGVg9XTxaQw+LiA2iBW o/Vm3gfA0BoViNa0vXSqfp1BgFkTmhCdtGg== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com Received: from usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com ([127.0.0.1]) by usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id yi8rN6M1wKqS for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 03:35:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.225.163.46] (unknown [10.225.163.46]) by usg-ed-osssrv.wdc.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4N9nLD6GLmz1RvLy; Mon, 14 Nov 2022 03:35:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <35650fd4-3152-56db-7c27-b9997e31cfc7@opensource.wdc.com> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 20:35:31 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.1 Subject: Re: Deprecating and removing SLOB Content-Language: en-US To: Vlastimil Babka , Conor Dooley Cc: Pasha Tatashin , Christoph Lameter , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Pekka Enberg , Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>, Matthew Wilcox , Roman Gushchin , Linus Torvalds , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Catalin Marinas , Rustam Kovhaev , Andrew Morton , Josh Triplett , Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Alexander Shiyan , Aaro Koskinen , Janusz Krzysztofik , Tony Lindgren , Yoshinori Sato , Rich Felker , Jonas Bonn , Stefan Kristiansson , Stafford Horne , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , openrisc@lists.librecores.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Geert Uytterhoeven , Conor.Dooley@microchip.com, Paul Cercueil References: <93079aba-362e-5d1e-e9b4-dfe3a84da750@opensource.wdc.com> <44da078c-b630-a249-bf50-67df83cd8347@suse.cz> From: Damien Le Moal Organization: Western Digital Research In-Reply-To: <44da078c-b630-a249-bf50-67df83cd8347@suse.cz> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20221114_033545_512280_99F2001C X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 37.64 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 11/14/22 18:36, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 11/14/22 06:48, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> On 11/14/22 10:55, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>> On 11/12/22 05:46, Conor Dooley wrote: >>>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 11:33:30AM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >>>>> On 11/8/22 22:44, Pasha Tatashin wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 10:55 AM Vlastimil Babka wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> as we all know, we currently have three slab allocators. As we discussed >>>>>>> at LPC [1], it is my hope that one of these allocators has a future, and >>>>>>> two of them do not. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The unsurprising reasons include code maintenance burden, other features >>>>>>> compatible with only a subset of allocators (or more effort spent on the >>>>>>> features), blocking API improvements (more on that below), and my >>>>>>> inability to pronounce SLAB and SLUB in a properly distinguishable way, >>>>>>> without resorting to spelling out the letters. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think (but may be proven wrong) that SLOB is the easier target of the >>>>>>> two to be removed, so I'd like to focus on it first. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I believe SLOB can be removed because: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - AFAIK nobody really uses it? It strives for minimal memory footprint >>>>>>> by putting all objects together, which has its CPU performance costs >>>>>>> (locking, lack of percpu caching, searching for free space...). I'm not >>>>>>> aware of any "tiny linux" deployment that opts for this. For example, >>>>>>> OpenWRT seems to use SLUB and the devices these days have e.g. 128MB >>>>>>> RAM, not up to 16 MB anymore. I've heard anecdotes that the performance >>>>>>> SLOB impact is too much for those who tried. Googling for >>>>>>> "CONFIG_SLOB=y" yielded nothing useful. >>>>>> >>>>>> I am all for removing SLOB. >>>>>> >>>>>> There are some devices with configs where SLOB is enabled by default. >>>>>> Perhaps, the owners/maintainers of those devices/configs should be >>>>>> included into this thread: >>>>>> >>>>>> tatashin@soleen:~/x/linux$ git grep SLOB=y >>>> >>>>>> arch/riscv/configs/nommu_k210_defconfig:CONFIG_SLOB=y >>>>>> arch/riscv/configs/nommu_k210_sdcard_defconfig:CONFIG_SLOB=y >>>>>> arch/riscv/configs/nommu_virt_defconfig:CONFIG_SLOB=y >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Turns out that since SLOB depends on EXPERT, many of those lack it so >>>>> running make defconfig ends up with SLUB anyway, unless I miss something. >>>>> Only a subset has both SLOB and EXPERT: >>>>> >>>>>> git grep CONFIG_EXPERT `git grep -l "CONFIG_SLOB=y"` >>>> >>>>> arch/riscv/configs/nommu_virt_defconfig:CONFIG_EXPERT=y >>>> >>>> I suppose there's not really a concern with the virt defconfig, but I >>>> did check the output of `make nommu_k210_defconfig" and despite not >>>> having expert it seems to end up CONFIG_SLOB=y in the generated .config. >>>> >>>> I do have a board with a k210 so I checked with s/SLOB/SLUB and it still >>>> boots etc, but I have no workloads or w/e to run on it. >>> >>> I sent a patch to change the k210 defconfig to using SLUB. However... > > Thanks! > >>> The current default config using SLOB gives about 630 free memory pages >>> after boot (cat /proc/vmstat). Switching to SLUB, this is down to about >>> 400 free memory pages (CONFIG_SLUB_CPU_PARTIAL is off). > > Thanks for the testing! How much RAM does the system have btw? I found 8MB > somewhere, is that correct? Yep, 8MB, that's it. > So 230 pages that's a ~920 kB difference. Last time we saw less dramatic > difference [1]. But that was looking at Slab pages, not free pages. The > extra overhead could be also in percpu allocations, code etc. > >>> This is with a buildroot kernel 5.19 build including a shell and sd-card >>> boot. With SLUB, I get clean boots and a shell prompt as expected. But I >>> definitely see more errors with shell commands failing due to allocation >>> failures for the shell process fork. So as far as the K210 is concerned, >>> switching to SLUB is not ideal. >>> >>> I would not want to hold on kernel mm improvements because of this toy >>> k210 though, so I am not going to prevent SLOB deprecation. I just wish >>> SLUB itself used less memory :) >> >> Did further tests with kernel 6.0.1: >> * SLOB: 630 free pages after boot, shell working (occasional shell fork >> failure happen though) >> * SLAB: getting memory allocation for order 7 failures on boot already >> (init process). Shell barely working (high frequency of shell command fork >> failures) I forgot to add here that the system was down to about 500 free pages after boot (again from the shell with "cat /proc/vmstat"). >> * SLUB: getting memory allocation for order 7 failures on boot. I do get a >> shell prompt but cannot run any shell command that involves forking a new >> process. For both slab and slub, I had cpu partial off, debug off and slab merge on, as I suspected that would lead to less memory overhead. I suspected memory fragmentation may be an issue but doing echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches before trying a shell command did not help much at all (it usually does on that board with SLOB). Note that this is all with buildroot, so this echo & redirect always works as it does not cause a shell fork. >> >> So if we want to keep the k210 support functional with a shell, we need >> slob. If we reduce that board support to only one application started as >> the init process, then I guess anything is OK. > > In [1] it was possible to save some more memory with more tuning. Some of > that required boot parameters and other code changes. In another reply [2] I > considered adding something like SLUB_TINY to take care of all that, so > looks like it would make sense to proceed with that. If you want me to test something, let me know. > > [1] > https://lore.kernel.org/all/Yg9xSWEaTZLA+hYt@ip-172-31-19-208.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/eebc9dc8-6a45-c099-61da-230d06cb3157@suse.cz/ -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel