From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] revert unconditional slab and page allocator fault injection calls
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 18:35:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240711-b4-fault-injection-reverts-v1-0-9e2651945d68@suse.cz> (raw)
These two patches largely revert commits that added function call
overhead into slab and page allocation hotpaths and that cannot be
currently disabled even though related CONFIG_ options do exist.
A much more involved solution that can keep the callsites always
existing but hidden behind a static key if unused, is possible [1] and
can be pursued by anyone who believes it's necessary. Meanwhile the fact
the should_failslab() error injection is already not functional on
kernels built with current gcc without anyone noticing [2], and lukewarm
response to [1] suggests the need is not there. I believe it will be
more fair to have the state after this series as a baseline for possible
further optimisation, instead of the unconditional overhead.
For example a possible compromise for anyone who's fine with an empty
function call overhead but not the full CONFIG_FAILSLAB /
CONFIG_FAIL_PAGE_ALLOC overhead is to reuse patch 1 from [1] but insert
a static key check only inside should_failslab() and
should_fail_alloc_page() before performing the more expensive checks.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240620-fault-injection-statickeys-v2-0-e23947d3d84b@suse.cz/#t
[2] https://github.com/bpftrace/bpftrace/issues/3258
Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
---
Vlastimil Babka (2):
mm, slab: put should_failslab() back behind CONFIG_SHOULD_FAILSLAB
mm, page_alloc: put should_fail_alloc_page() back behing CONFIG_FAIL_PAGE_ALLOC
include/linux/fault-inject.h | 11 ++++-------
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 4 ++++
mm/fail_page_alloc.c | 4 +++-
mm/failslab.c | 14 ++++++++------
mm/page_alloc.c | 6 ------
mm/slub.c | 8 --------
6 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: 256abd8e550ce977b728be79a74e1729438b4948
change-id: 20240711-b4-fault-injection-reverts-e4d099e620f5
Best regards,
--
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
next reply other threads:[~2024-07-11 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-11 16:35 Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2024-07-11 16:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm, slab: put should_failslab() back behind CONFIG_SHOULD_FAILSLAB Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-11 16:35 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm, page_alloc: put should_fail_alloc_page() back behing CONFIG_FAIL_PAGE_ALLOC Vlastimil Babka
2024-07-11 19:36 ` [PATCH 0/2] revert unconditional slab and page allocator fault injection calls Andrew Morton
2024-07-12 7:19 ` Vlastimil Babka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240711-b4-fault-injection-reverts-v1-0-9e2651945d68@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=akinobu.mita@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).