On 8/20/22 03:02, lizhe.67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> On 2022-08-18 7:36 UTC, mhocko@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> From: Li Zhe <lizhe.67@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> In 'commit 2f1ee0913ce5 ("Revert "mm: use early_pfn_to_nid in page_ext_init"")',
>>> we call page_ext_init() after page_alloc_init_late() to avoid some panic
>>> problem. It seems that we cannot track early page allocations in current
>>> kernel even if page structure has been initialized early.
>>>
>>> This patch move up page_ext_init() to catch early page allocations when
>>> DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT is n. After this patch, we only need to turn
>>> DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT to n then we are able to analyze the early page
>>> allocations. This is useful especially when we find that the free memory
>>> value is not the same right after different kernel booting.
>>
>>is this actually useful in practice? I mean who is going to disable
>>DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT and recompile the kernel for debugging early
>>allocations?
>
> Yes it is useful. We use this method to catch the difference of early
> page allocations between two kernel.
>
>> I do see how debugging those early allocations might be useful but that
>> would require a boot time option to be practical IMHO. Would it make
>> sense to add a early_page_ext parameter which would essentially disable
>> the deferred ipage initialization. That should be quite trivial to
>> achieve (just hook into defer_init AFAICS).
>
> It is a good idea. A cmdline parameter is a flexible and dynamic method for
> us to decide whether to defer page's and page_ext's initilization. For
> comparison, this patch provides a static method to decide whether to defer
> page's and page_ext's initilization. They are not conflicting. My next
> work is trying to achieve your idea.
As we already have to pass page_owner=on parameter to enable the page
allocation tracking in the first place, maybe that alone could also disable
deffered init, and no need for another parameter?
> --
> Li Zhe
