On 6/29/22 04:49, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 7:35 PM Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Jun 2022, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>
>> > > That is a relatively new feature due to RT logic support. without RT this
>> > > would be a simple irq disable.
>> >
>> > Not just RT.
>> > It's a slow path:
>> > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT) ||
>> > unlikely(!object || !slab || !node_match(slab, node))) {
>> > local_unlock_irqrestore(&s->cpu_slab->lock,...);
>> > and that's not the only lock in there.
>> > new_slab->allocate_slab... alloc_pages grabbing more locks.
>>
>>
>> Its not a lock for !RT.
>>
>> The fastpath is lockless if hardware allows that but then we go into more
>> and more serialiation needs as the allocation gets more into the page
>> allocator logic.
Yeah I don't think the recent RT-related changes made this much worse than
it already was. In alloc side you could perhaps try the really lockless
fastpaths only and fail if e.g. the per-cpu slabs were empty (but would BPF
be happy with that?). On the free side though you could end up having to
move a slab from partial to free list as a result, and now a spin lock is
needed (even before the RT changes), and you can't really fail a free...
> On RT fast path == slow path with a lock.
> On !RT fast path is lock less.
> That's all correct.
> bpf side has to make sure safety in all possible paths
> therefore RT or !RT makes no difference.
So AFAIK we don't right now have what BFP needs - an extra-constrained kind
of GFP_ATOMIC. I don't object you adding it privately. But it's another
reason to think about if these things can be generalized. For example we had
a discussion about the Maple tree having kinda similar kinds of requirements
to avoid its tree node preallocations always for the worst possible case.
I'm not sure we can sanely implement this within each of SLAB/SLUB/SLOB, or
rather provide a generic cache on top...
