Re: panic in uma_startup for many-core amd64 system

From: Giovanni Trematerra <gianni_at_freebsd.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 23:02:19 +0100
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 8:14 PM, John Baldwin <jhb_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Monday, November 01, 2010 1:09:22 pm Giovanni Trematerra wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Andriy Gapon <avg_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
>> > on 19/10/2010 00:01 Giovanni Trematerra said the following:
>> >>
>> >> Your patch seems just a work around about initial slab size where the
>> >> keg is backed.
>> >
>> > Well, setting aside my confusion with the terminology - yes, the patch is
> just
>> > that, and precisely because I only tried to solve that particular problem.
>> >
>> >> Having dynamic slab sizes would allow to have the keg backed on a larger
> slab
>> >> without going OFFPAGE.
>> >
>> > I agree in principle.
>> > But without seeing code that implements that I can't guess if it would
> really be
>> > more efficient or more maintainable, i.e. more useful in general.
>> > Still a very good idea.
>> >
>>
>> Here the patch that was in my mind.
>> The patch doesn't implement dynamic slab size just allow
>> to have a multipage slab to back uma_zone objects.
>> I'm going to work more on the topic "dynamic slab size" soon.
>> I tested the patch on qemu with -smp 32.
>> I'm looking for real hw to test the patch on.
>>
>> here some interesting output:
>> qemulab# vmstat -z | more
>> ITEM                   SIZE  LIMIT     USED     FREE      REQ FAIL SLEEP
>>
>> UMA Kegs:               208,      0,     149,       4,     149,   0,   0
>> UMA Zones:             4480,      0,     149,       0,     149,   0,   0
>> UMA Slabs:              568,      0,     836,       4,    1187,   0,   0
>> UMA RCntSlabs:          568,      0,     202,       1,     202,   0,   0
>> UMA Hash:               256,      0,       2,      13,       3,   0,   0
>>
>> qemulab# sysctl kern | grep cpu
>> kern.ccpu: 0
>>   <cpu count="32" mask="0xffffffff">0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,
>> 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27,
>> 28, 29, 30, 31</cpu>
>> kern.smp.cpus: 32
>> kern.smp.maxcpus: 32
>>
>> Any feedback will be appreciate.
>>
>> --
>> Giovanni Trematerra
>>
>>
>> ==============================================================
>> diff -r 36572cbc6817 sys/vm/uma_core.c
>> --- a/sys/vm/uma_core.c       Tue Oct 05 04:49:04 2010 -0400
>> +++ b/sys/vm/uma_core.c       Mon Nov 01 11:54:38 2010 -0400
>> _at__at_ -930,27 +930,36 _at__at_ startup_alloc(uma_zone_t zone, int bytes
>>  {
>>       uma_keg_t keg;
>>       uma_slab_t tmps;
>> -
>> -     keg = zone_first_keg(zone);
>> +     u_int16_t pages;
>> +
>> +     keg   = zone_first_keg(zone);
>> +     pages = bytes / PAGE_SIZE;
>> +
>> +     /* Account for remainder */
>> +     if ((pages * PAGE_SIZE) < bytes)
>> +             pages++;
>> +     KASSERT(pages > 0, ("startup_alloc can't reserve 0 pages\n"));
>
> You can use 'pages = howmany(bytes, PAGE_SIZE)' here.

Thanks for the hint.

> Also, why did you make
> pages a uint16_t instead of an int?  An int is generally more convenient
> unless you really need a uint16_t (and C99 spells it without an _ after the
> leading 'u'.. FYI).

Uhm just to be coherent with field uk_ppera of struct keg, but I think
I can just use an int.
BTW is new code supposed to use C99 form even if the rest of the file
use u_int* form?

>
>>       /*
>>        * Check our small startup cache to see if it has pages remaining.
>>        */
>>       mtx_lock(&uma_boot_pages_mtx);
>> -     if ((tmps = LIST_FIRST(&uma_boot_pages)) != NULL) {
>> -             LIST_REMOVE(tmps, us_link);
>> +     do {
>> +             if ((tmps = LIST_FIRST(&uma_boot_pages)) != NULL)
>> +                     LIST_REMOVE(tmps, us_link);
>> +     } while (--pages && tmps != NULL);
>> +     if (tmps != NULL) {
>>               mtx_unlock(&uma_boot_pages_mtx);
>>               *pflag = tmps->us_flags;
>>               return (tmps->us_data);
>> -     }
>> +     } else if (booted == 0)
>> +             panic("UMA: Increase vm.boot_pages");
>>       mtx_unlock(&uma_boot_pages_mtx);
>> -     if (booted == 0)
>> -             panic("UMA: Increase vm.boot_pages");
>
> Probably best to make the pages test here explicit.  Also, is there any reason
> you can't do this as:
>
>        while (--pages > 0) {
>                tmps = LIST_FIRST(&uma_boot_pages);
>                if (tmps != NULL)
>                        LIST_REMOVE(tmps, us_link);
>                else if (booted == 0)
>                        panic(...);
>        }
>

Well, no, even if I'll need to initialize tmps to NULL otherwise the
compiler will
raise a warning.
do {} while(); might be still better than a while(){}. bytes parameter
will never be
zero so pages will always be at least one and KASSERT will catch some
wired behavior.
Anyway that looks to me more readable, thanks. I could add an "else
break;" just in
the few cases that "pages" is still > 0 and tmps == NULL, that could
be useless though.

> One question btw, how does this work since if you need to allocate more than 1
> page it seems that the 'tmps' values for all but the last are simply ignored
> and leaked?

When you extract one item from the list you have tmps->us_data
pointing to start address of the memory page. The pages are contiguous
in decrescent
order of address (see below) so when you extract 2 items the last one
will point at
the start address of 2 contiguous pages of memory, just what I need to return.

>
> Is there some unwritten assumption that the free pages are all virtually
> contiguous (and in order), so you can just pull off a run of X and use
> the address from X?
>

sys/vm/vm_page.c:351 _at__at_ vm_page_startup(vm_offset_t vaddr)

  /*
     * Allocate memory for use when boot strapping the kernel memory
     * allocator.
     */
    new_end = end - (boot_pages * UMA_SLAB_SIZE);
    new_end = trunc_page(new_end);
    mapped = pmap_map(&vaddr, new_end, end,
        VM_PROT_READ | VM_PROT_WRITE);
    bzero((void *)mapped, end - new_end);
    uma_startup((void *)mapped, boot_pages);

--------

sys/vm/uma_core.c:1683 _at__at_ uma_startup(void *bootmem, int boot_pages)

#ifdef UMA_DEBUG
    printf("Filling boot free list.\n");
#endif
    for (i = 0; i < boot_pages; i++) {
        slab = (uma_slab_t)((u_int8_t *)bootmem + (i * UMA_SLAB_SIZE));
        slab->us_data = (u_int8_t *)slab;
        slab->us_flags = UMA_SLAB_BOOT;
        LIST_INSERT_HEAD(&uma_boot_pages, slab, us_link);
    }

So if I'm not wrong I'd say that the pages are virtually contiguous.

Just for the record, attilio_at_ made a light review of this patch in private.

--
Giovanni Trematerra
Received on Mon Nov 01 2010 - 21:02:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:08 UTC