locking/lockdep: Reuse freed chain_hlocks entries
Once a lock class is zapped, all the lock chains that include the zapped class are essentially useless. The lock_chain structure itself can be reused, but not the corresponding chain_hlocks[] entries. Over time, we will run out of chain_hlocks entries while there are still plenty of other lockdep array entries available. To fix this imbalance, we have to make chain_hlocks entries reusable just like the others. As the freed chain_hlocks entries are in blocks of various lengths. A simple bitmap like the one used in the other reusable lockdep arrays isn't applicable. Instead the chain_hlocks entries are put into bucketed lists (MAX_CHAIN_BUCKETS) of chain blocks. Bucket 0 is the variable size bucket which houses chain blocks of size larger than MAX_CHAIN_BUCKETS sorted in decreasing size order. Initially, the whole array is in one chain block (the primordial chain block) in bucket 0. The minimum size of a chain block is 2 chain_hlocks entries. That will be the minimum allocation size. In other word, allocation requests for one chain_hlocks entry will cause 2-entry block to be returned and hence 1 entry will be wasted. Allocation requests for the chain_hlocks are fulfilled first by looking for chain block of matching size. If not found, the first chain block from bucket[0] (the largest one) is split. That can cause hlock entries fragmentation and reduce allocation efficiency if a chain block of size > MAX_CHAIN_BUCKETS is ever zapped and put back to after the primordial chain block. So the MAX_CHAIN_BUCKETS must be large enough that this should seldom happen. By reusing the chain_hlocks entries, we are able to handle workloads that add and zap a lot of lock classes without the risk of running out of chain_hlocks entries as long as the total number of outstanding lock classes at any time remain within a reasonable limit. Two new tracking counters, nr_free_chain_hlocks & nr_large_chain_blocks, are added to track the total number of chain_hlocks entries in the free bucketed lists and the number of large chain blocks in buckets[0] respectively. The nr_free_chain_hlocks replaces nr_chain_hlocks. The nr_large_chain_blocks counter enables to see if we should increase the number of buckets (MAX_CHAIN_BUCKETS) available so as to avoid to avoid the fragmentation problem in bucket[0]. An internal nfsd test that ran for more than an hour and kept on loading and unloading kernel modules could cause the following message to be displayed. [ 4318.443670] BUG: MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low! The patched kernel was able to complete the test with a lot of free chain_hlocks entries to spare: # cat /proc/lockdep_stats : dependency chains: 18867 [max: 65536] dependency chain hlocks: 74926 [max: 327680] dependency chain hlocks lost: 0 : zapped classes: 1541 zapped lock chains: 56765 large chain blocks: 1 By changing MAX_CHAIN_BUCKETS to 3 and add a counter for the size of the largest chain block. The system still worked and We got the following lockdep_stats data: dependency chains: 18601 [max: 65536] dependency chain hlocks used: 73133 [max: 327680] dependency chain hlocks lost: 0 : zapped classes: 1541 zapped lock chains: 56702 large chain blocks: 45165 large chain block size: 20165 By running the test again, I was indeed able to cause chain_hlocks entries to get lost: dependency chain hlocks used: 74806 [max: 327680] dependency chain hlocks lost: 575 : large chain blocks: 48737 large chain block size: 7 Due to the fragmentation, it is possible that the "MAX_LOCKDEP_CHAIN_HLOCKS too low!" error can happen even if a lot of of chain_hlocks entries appear to be free. Fortunately, a MAX_CHAIN_BUCKETS value of 16 should be big enough that few variable sized chain blocks, other than the initial one, should ever be present in bucket 0. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200206152408.24165-7-longman@redhat.com
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment