Re: [PATCH] mm/debug_pagealloc: Ask users for default setting of debug_pagealloc
From: Christian Borntraeger
Date: Mon Jan 25 2016 - 04:46:04 EST
On 01/25/2016 10:41 AM, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:19:48AM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> since commit 031bc5743f158 ("mm/debug-pagealloc: make debug-pagealloc
>> boottime configurable") CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC is by default a no-op.
>> This resulted in several unnoticed bugs, e.g.
>> as this behaviour change was not even documented in Kconfig.
>> Let's provide a new Kconfig symbol that allows to change the default
>> back to enabled, e.g. for debug kernels. This also makes the change
>> obvious to kernel packagers.
>> Let's also change the Kconfig description for CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC,
>> to indicate that it is ok to enable this by default.
>> Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> mm/Kconfig.debug | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>> mm/page_alloc.c | 6 +++++-
>> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> diff --git a/mm/Kconfig.debug b/mm/Kconfig.debug
>> index 957d3da..4cf1212 100644
>> --- a/mm/Kconfig.debug
>> +++ b/mm/Kconfig.debug
>> @@ -26,5 +26,22 @@ config DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
>> that would result in incorrect warnings of memory corruption after
>> a resume because free pages are not saved to the suspend image.
>> + By default this option will be almost for free and can be activated
>> + in distribution kernels. The overhead and the debugging can be enabled
>> + by DEBUG_PAGEALLOC_ENABLE_DEFAULT or the debug_pagealloc command line
>> + parameter.
> Sorry, but it's not almost for free and should not be used by distribution
> kernels. If we have DEBUG_PAGEALLOC enabled, at least on s390 we will not
> make use of 2GB and 1MB pagetable entries for the identy mapping anymore.
> Instead we will only use 4K mappings.
Hmmm, can we change these code areas to use debug_pagealloc_enabled? I guess
this evaluated too late?
> I assume this is true for all architectures since freeing pages can happen
> in any context and therefore we can't allocate memory in order to split
> page tables.
> So enabling this will cost memory and put more pressure on the TLB.
So I will change the description and drop the "if unsure" statement.