From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Marcin Wojtas <mw@semihalf.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: "Lior Amsalem" <alior@marvell.com>,
"Thomas Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>,
"Yehuda Yitschak" <yehuday@marvell.com>,
"Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
"Grzegorz Jaszczyk" <jaz@semihalf.com>,
"Will Deacon" <will.deacon@arm.com>,
nadavh@marvell.com, "Tomasz Nowicki" <tn@semihalf.com>,
"Gregory Clément" <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Page allocation failures with newest kernels
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 11:17:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <574D64A0.2070207@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPv3WKcVsWBgHHC3UPNcbka2JUmN4CTw1Ym4BR1=1V9=B9av5Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 31/05/16 04:02, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After rebasing platform support of two different ARMv8 SoC's from v4.1
> baseline to v4.4 it occurred that stressed systems tend to have page
> allocation problems, related to creating new slabs:
>
> http://pastebin.com/FhRW5DsF
>
> Steps to reproduce:
> - use SATA drive (on-board or over PCIe) with 2 btrfs 50G partitions
> - run a couple of loops of following script:
> mount /dev/sd${1}1 /mnt
> mount /dev/sd${1}2 /mnt2
> i=0
> while [[ $i -lt ${2} ]]
> do
> echo -e "i = ${i}\n"
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/3g bs=3M count=1024 &
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/2g bs=2M count=1024 &
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/1g bs=1M count=1024 &
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt2/2g bs=2M count=1024 &
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt2/1g bs=1M count=1024 &
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt2/3g bs=3M count=1024
> let "i++"
> done
>
> The issue also reproduced on v4.6. Usually problems occur within first
> iteration and then the rest is done without errors, also kernel remain
> stable. I got an information, that page alloc problem were observed
> also on Marvell ARMv7 platfrom (Armada38x).
I remember there were some issues around 4.2 with the revision of the
arm64 atomic implementations affecting the cmpxchg_double() in SLUB, but
those should all be fixed (and the symptoms tended to be considerably
more fatal). A stronger candidate would be 97303480753e (which landed in
4.4), which has various knock-on effects on the layout of SLUB internals
- does fiddling with L1_CACHE_SHIFT make any difference?
Robin.
> About the debug itself - after adding simplest possible trace in
> trace/events/kmem.h (single argument u64 for counter or whatever kind
> of number), it was shown both on v4.1 and v4.4 following condition is
> achieved multiple times during test:
> In __alloc_pages_nodemask(), during the test kernel jumps huge amount
> of times (~250k times in v4.1 and ~570k in v4.4 per one script loop)
> into following 'unlikely' condition:
> page = get_page_from_freelist(alloc_mask, order, alloc_flags, &ac);
> if (unlikely(!page)) {
> [...]
> page = __alloc_pages_slowpath(alloc_mask, order, &ac);
> }
>
> The further difference is seen in __alloc_pages_slowpath().
> warn_alloc_page() (routine responsible for printing page alloc failure
> message) is reached via following condition:
> if (!can_direct_reclaim) {
> [...]
> goto nopage;
> }
> In v4.1 ~5 times and in v4.4 ~40 times per one script loop.
>
> Printing message however can be blocked by following condition in
> warn_alloc_fail():
> if ((gfp_mask & _GFP_NOWARN) || !_ratelimit(&nopage_rs) ||
> debug_guardpage_minorder() > 0)
> return;
> Only first two are relevant. As ratelimit is derived directly from
> CONFIG_HZ and this parameter differ between v4.1 and v4.4 (100 vs 250,
> also CONFIG_SCHED_HRTICK is enabled only in v4.4) the configs were
> swapped, but no change in behavior.
>
> Also within 'faulty' revision there is a difference, depending on
> filesystem used - with buildroot the dumps occur, but with same test
> under ubuntu - it's impossible see the failure output (and it's not a
> question of dmesg level:)). Comparing /proc/sys/vm contents didn't
> show anything meaningful.
>
> I tried to analyze changes around mm/ folder between v4.1 and v4.4
> that may cause such difference, but wasn't able to find out what may
> be causing the issue. Have anyone encountered such problems in recent
> revisions? I would be very grateful for any hint or comment. Also if
> any other data can be captured, please let know.
>
> Best regards,
> Marcin Wojtas
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-31 10:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-31 3:02 [BUG] Page allocation failures with newest kernels Marcin Wojtas
2016-05-31 10:17 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
2016-05-31 10:29 ` Marcin Wojtas
2016-05-31 13:10 ` Yehuda Yitschak
2016-05-31 13:15 ` Will Deacon
2016-06-02 5:48 ` Marcin Wojtas
2016-06-02 13:52 ` Mel Gorman
2016-06-02 19:01 ` Marcin Wojtas
2016-06-03 9:53 ` Mel Gorman
2016-06-03 11:57 ` Marcin Wojtas
2016-06-03 12:36 ` Mel Gorman
2016-06-07 17:36 ` Marcin Wojtas
2016-06-08 10:09 ` Mel Gorman
2016-06-09 18:13 ` Marcin Wojtas
2016-06-10 16:08 ` Marcin Wojtas
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=574D64A0.2070207@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=alior@marvell.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=gregory.clement@free-electrons.com \
--cc=jaz@semihalf.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mw@semihalf.com \
--cc=nadavh@marvell.com \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=tn@semihalf.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=yehuday@marvell.com \
/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).