Re: [PATCH] tracing: Fix wasted memory in saved_cmdlines logic

[Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>]

On Thu, 2024-02-08 at 10:53 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> 
> While looking at improving the saved_cmdlines cache I found a huge amount
> of wasted memory that should be used for the cmdlines.
> 
> The tracing data saves pids during the trace. At sched switch, if a trace
> occurred, it will save the comm of the task that did the trace. This is
> saved in a "cache" that maps pids to comms and exposed to user space via
> the /sys/kernel/tracing/saved_cmdlines file. Currently it only caches by
> default 128 comms.
> 
> The structure that uses this creates an array to store the pids using
> PID_MAX_DEFAULT (which is usually set to 32768). This causes the structure
> to be of the size of 131104 bytes on 64 bit machines.
> 
> In hex: 131104 = 0x20020, and since the kernel allocates generic memory in
> powers of two, the kernel would allocate 0x40000 or 262144 bytes to store
> this structure. That leaves 131040 bytes of wasted space.
> 
> Worse, the structure points to an allocated array to store the comm names,
> which is 16 bytes times the amount of names to save (currently 128), which
> is 2048 bytes. Instead of allocating a separate array, make the structure
> end with a variable length string and use the extra space for that.
> 
> This is similar to a recommendation that Linus had made about eventfs_inode names:
> 
>   https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240130190355.11486-5-torvalds@linux-foundation.org/
> 
> Instead of allocating a separate string array to hold the saved comms,
> have the structure end with: char saved_cmdlines[]; and round up to the
> next power of two over sizeof(struct saved_cmdline_buffers) + num_cmdlines * TASK_COMM_LEN
> It will use this extra space for the saved_cmdline portion.
> 
> Now, instead of saving only 128 comms by default, by using this wasted
> space at the end of the structure it can save over 8000 comms and even
> saves space by removing the need for allocating the other array.

The change looks good to me code wise.  But it seems like we are still
overallocating as we can now accommodate 8000 comms when 128
was asked for.

Wonder if we can reduce the default ask to 127 comm so we don't have to
go to the next page order?

Tim