1. Patchew
  2. linux
  3. View series

[PATCH] mm: rt-threads retry mempool allocation without delay

Zhiguo Jiang posted 1 patch 3 months, 3 weeks ago 
mm/mempool.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
[PATCH] mm: rt-threads retry mempool allocation without delay
Posted by Zhiguo Jiang 3 months, 3 weeks ago 
The real-time(rt) threads are delayed for 5 seconds in mempool_alloc,
which will seriously affect the timeliness of front-end applications
and the user experience lag issues.

The real-time(rt) threads should retry mempool allocation without
delay and in order to obtain the required memory resources as soon as
possible.

The following example shows that the real-time(rt) QoSCoreThread
prio=98 blocks 5 seconds in mempool_alloc, seriously affecting the
user experience.

Running process:	system_server (pid 2245)
Running thread:	QoSCoreThread 2529
State:	Uninterruptible Sleep - Block I/O
Start:	12,859.616 ms
Systrace Time:	100,063.057104
Duration:	5,152.591 ms
On CPU:
Running instead:	kswapd0
Args:	{kernel callsite when blocked:: "mempool_alloc+0x130/0x1e8"}

   QoSCoreThread-2529  (   2245) [000] d..2. 100063.057104: sched_switch:
   prev_comm=QoSCoreThread prev_pid=2529 prev_prio=000255001000098
   prev_state=D ==> next_comm=kswapd0 next_pid=107
   next_prio=000063310000120
 [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] dNs2. 100068.209675: sched_waking:
 comm=QoSCoreThread pid=2529 prio=98 target_cpu=000
 [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] dNs2. 100068.209676:
 sched_blocked_reason: pid=2529 iowait=1 caller=mempool_alloc+0x130/0x1e8
 [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] dNs3. 100068.209695: sched_wakeup:
 comm=QoSCoreThread pid=2529 prio=98 target_cpu=000
 [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] d..2. 100068.209732: sched_switch:
 prev_comm=[GT]ColdPool#14 prev_pid=23937 prev_prio=000003010342130
 prev_state=R ==> next_comm=QoSCoreThread next_pid=2529
 next_prio=000255131000098

Signed-off-by: Zhiguo Jiang <justinjiang@vivo.com>
---
 mm/mempool.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/mempool.c b/mm/mempool.c
--- a/mm/mempool.c
+++ b/mm/mempool.c
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
 #include <linux/export.h>
 #include <linux/mempool.h>
 #include <linux/writeback.h>
+#include <linux/sched/prio.h>
 #include "slab.h"
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON
@@ -386,7 +387,7 @@ void *mempool_alloc_noprof(mempool_t *pool, gfp_t gfp_mask)
 	void *element;
 	unsigned long flags;
 	wait_queue_entry_t wait;
-	gfp_t gfp_temp;
+	gfp_t gfp_temp, gfp_src = gfp_mask;
 
 	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(gfp_mask & __GFP_ZERO);
 	might_alloc(gfp_mask);
@@ -433,6 +434,16 @@ void *mempool_alloc_noprof(mempool_t *pool, gfp_t gfp_mask)
 		return NULL;
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * We will try to direct reclaim cyclically, if the rt-thread
+	 * is without __GFP_NORETRY.
+	 */
+	if (!(gfp_src & __GFP_NORETRY) && current->prio < MAX_RT_PRIO) {
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->lock, flags);
+		gfp_temp = gfp_src;
+		goto repeat_alloc;
+	}
+
 	/* Let's wait for someone else to return an element to @pool */
 	init_wait(&wait);
 	prepare_to_wait(&pool->wait, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
-- 
2.48.1
Re: [PATCH] mm: rt-threads retry mempool allocation without delay
Posted by Andrew Morton 3 months, 3 weeks ago 
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 17:10:44 +0800 Zhiguo Jiang <justinjiang@vivo.com> wrote:

> The real-time(rt) threads are delayed for 5 seconds in mempool_alloc,
> which will seriously affect the timeliness of front-end applications
> and the user experience lag issues.

Oh God, do we really do that?

Yes we do!  I'm surprised this wasn't reported some time over the
intervening 13 years.

Yes, a hard-coded 5 second delay might be a slight problem in a
realtime kernel.

> The real-time(rt) threads should retry mempool allocation without
> delay and in order to obtain the required memory resources as soon as
> possible.

Well, does this actually work in your testing?

I guess it can improve the situation, some of the time.  If it's a
uniprocessor non-preemptible then perhaps interrupt-time writeback
completion might save us, otherwise it's time to hit the power button.

> The following example shows that the real-time(rt) QoSCoreThread
> prio=98 blocks 5 seconds in mempool_alloc, seriously affecting the
> user experience.
> 
> Running process:	system_server (pid 2245)
> Running thread:	QoSCoreThread 2529
> State:	Uninterruptible Sleep - Block I/O
> Start:	12,859.616 ms
> Systrace Time:	100,063.057104
> Duration:	5,152.591 ms
> On CPU:
> Running instead:	kswapd0
> Args:	{kernel callsite when blocked:: "mempool_alloc+0x130/0x1e8"}
> 
>    QoSCoreThread-2529  (   2245) [000] d..2. 100063.057104: sched_switch:
>    prev_comm=QoSCoreThread prev_pid=2529 prev_prio=000255001000098
>    prev_state=D ==> next_comm=kswapd0 next_pid=107
>    next_prio=000063310000120
>  [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] dNs2. 100068.209675: sched_waking:
>  comm=QoSCoreThread pid=2529 prio=98 target_cpu=000
>  [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] dNs2. 100068.209676:
>  sched_blocked_reason: pid=2529 iowait=1 caller=mempool_alloc+0x130/0x1e8
>  [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] dNs3. 100068.209695: sched_wakeup:
>  comm=QoSCoreThread pid=2529 prio=98 target_cpu=000
>  [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] d..2. 100068.209732: sched_switch:
>  prev_comm=[GT]ColdPool#14 prev_pid=23937 prev_prio=000003010342130
>  prev_state=R ==> next_comm=QoSCoreThread next_pid=2529
>  next_prio=000255131000098

Do you have a call trace for these stalls?  I'm interested to see who
is calling mempool_alloc() here.  Perhaps a suitable solution is to
teach the caller(s) to stop passing __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM and to handle
the NULL return.

> --- a/mm/mempool.c
> +++ b/mm/mempool.c
> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
>  #include <linux/export.h>
>  #include <linux/mempool.h>
>  #include <linux/writeback.h>
> +#include <linux/sched/prio.h>
>  #include "slab.h"
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON
> @@ -386,7 +387,7 @@ void *mempool_alloc_noprof(mempool_t *pool, gfp_t gfp_mask)
>  	void *element;
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  	wait_queue_entry_t wait;
> -	gfp_t gfp_temp;
> +	gfp_t gfp_temp, gfp_src = gfp_mask;
>  
>  	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(gfp_mask & __GFP_ZERO);
>  	might_alloc(gfp_mask);
> @@ -433,6 +434,16 @@ void *mempool_alloc_noprof(mempool_t *pool, gfp_t gfp_mask)
>  		return NULL;
>  	}
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * We will try to direct reclaim cyclically, if the rt-thread

"synchronously"

> +	 * is without __GFP_NORETRY.
> +	 */
> +	if (!(gfp_src & __GFP_NORETRY) && current->prio < MAX_RT_PRIO) {
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->lock, flags);
> +		gfp_temp = gfp_src;
> +		goto repeat_alloc;
> +	}
> +
>  	/* Let's wait for someone else to return an element to @pool */
>  	init_wait(&wait);
>  	prepare_to_wait(&pool->wait, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
Re: [PATCH] mm: rt-threads retry mempool allocation without delay
Posted by zhiguojiang 3 months, 3 weeks ago 

在 2025/6/18 8:25, Andrew Morton 写道:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 17:10:44 +0800 Zhiguo Jiang <justinjiang@vivo.com> wrote:
>
>> The real-time(rt) threads are delayed for 5 seconds in mempool_alloc,
>> which will seriously affect the timeliness of front-end applications
>> and the user experience lag issues.
> Oh God, do we really do that?
>
> Yes we do!  I'm surprised this wasn't reported some time over the
> intervening 13 years.
>
> Yes, a hard-coded 5 second delay might be a slight problem in a
> realtime kernel.
>
>> The real-time(rt) threads should retry mempool allocation without
>> delay and in order to obtain the required memory resources as soon as
>> possible.
> Well, does this actually work in your testing?
>
> I guess it can improve the situation, some of the time.  If it's a
> uniprocessor non-preemptible then perhaps interrupt-time writeback
> completion might save us, otherwise it's time to hit the power button.
Hi Andrew Morton,

It should be solved. We conducted the same test but did not reproduce
the issue.

I added trace_mm_mempool_alloc_start() in mempool_alloc_noprof(),
void *mempool_alloc_noprof(mempool_t *pool, gfp_t gfp_mask)
{
     void *element;
     unsigned long flags;
     wait_queue_entry_t wait;
     gfp_t gfp_temp, gfp_src = gfp_mask;

     VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(gfp_mask & __GFP_ZERO);
     might_alloc(gfp_mask);

+    trace_mm_mempool_alloc_start(gfp_mask, current->prio);

     gfp_mask |= __GFP_NOMEMALLOC; /* don't allocate emergency reserves */

we can see that the gfps of the QoSCoreThread thread are as follows,

QoSCoreThread-2421    [005] .....   120.217517: mm_mempool_alloc_start:
     prio=98, gfp_flags=GFP_ATOMIC
QoSCoreThread-2421    [005] .....   120.217512: mm_mempool_alloc_start:
     prio=98, gfp_flags=GFP_NOFS
QoSCoreThread-2421    [005] .....   120.217513: mm_mempool_alloc_start:
     prio=98, gfp_flags=GFP_NOIO
QoSCoreThread-2421    [005] .....   120.217524: mm_mempool_alloc_start:
     prio=98, gfp_flags=GFP_KERNEL

1) GFP_ATOMIC can directly return NULL;
2) GFP_NOFS, GFP_NOIO, and GFP_KERNEL all contain __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM,
and if the allocation fails, them will enter sleep to wait.

So, regarding the situation in 2), my modification can solve the issue.
>> The following example shows that the real-time(rt) QoSCoreThread
>> prio=98 blocks 5 seconds in mempool_alloc, seriously affecting the
>> user experience.
>>
>> Running process:	system_server (pid 2245)
>> Running thread:	QoSCoreThread 2529
>> State:	Uninterruptible Sleep - Block I/O
>> Start:	12,859.616 ms
>> Systrace Time:	100,063.057104
>> Duration:	5,152.591 ms
>> On CPU:
>> Running instead:	kswapd0
>> Args:	{kernel callsite when blocked:: "mempool_alloc+0x130/0x1e8"}
>>
>>     QoSCoreThread-2529  (   2245) [000] d..2. 100063.057104: sched_switch:
>>     prev_comm=QoSCoreThread prev_pid=2529 prev_prio=000255001000098
>>     prev_state=D ==> next_comm=kswapd0 next_pid=107
>>     next_prio=000063310000120
>>   [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] dNs2. 100068.209675: sched_waking:
>>   comm=QoSCoreThread pid=2529 prio=98 target_cpu=000
>>   [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] dNs2. 100068.209676:
>>   sched_blocked_reason: pid=2529 iowait=1 caller=mempool_alloc+0x130/0x1e8
>>   [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] dNs3. 100068.209695: sched_wakeup:
>>   comm=QoSCoreThread pid=2529 prio=98 target_cpu=000
>>   [GT]ColdPool#14-23937 (  23854) [000] d..2. 100068.209732: sched_switch:
>>   prev_comm=[GT]ColdPool#14 prev_pid=23937 prev_prio=000003010342130
>>   prev_state=R ==> next_comm=QoSCoreThread next_pid=2529
>>   next_prio=000255131000098
> Do you have a call trace for these stalls?  I'm interested to see who
> is calling mempool_alloc() here.  Perhaps a suitable solution is to
> teach the caller(s) to stop passing __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM and to handle
> the NULL return.
Sorry, we conducted the same test but did not reproduce the issue, so the
probability is relatively low. I think there are multiple possibilities
for this situation, and different rt-threads may sleep in different
situations. So some improvement strategies should be implemented in
mempool_alloc.
>> --- a/mm/mempool.c
>> +++ b/mm/mempool.c
>> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
>>   #include <linux/export.h>
>>   #include <linux/mempool.h>
>>   #include <linux/writeback.h>
>> +#include <linux/sched/prio.h>
>>   #include "slab.h"
>>   
>>   #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON
>> @@ -386,7 +387,7 @@ void *mempool_alloc_noprof(mempool_t *pool, gfp_t gfp_mask)
>>   	void *element;
>>   	unsigned long flags;
>>   	wait_queue_entry_t wait;
>> -	gfp_t gfp_temp;
>> +	gfp_t gfp_temp, gfp_src = gfp_mask;
>>   
>>   	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(gfp_mask & __GFP_ZERO);
>>   	might_alloc(gfp_mask);
>> @@ -433,6 +434,16 @@ void *mempool_alloc_noprof(mempool_t *pool, gfp_t gfp_mask)
>>   		return NULL;
>>   	}
>>   
>> +	/*
>> +	 * We will try to direct reclaim cyclically, if the rt-thread
> "synchronously"
>
>> +	 * is without __GFP_NORETRY.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (!(gfp_src & __GFP_NORETRY) && current->prio < MAX_RT_PRIO) {
>> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->lock, flags);
>> +		gfp_temp = gfp_src;
>> +		goto repeat_alloc;
>> +	}
>> +
>>   	/* Let's wait for someone else to return an element to @pool */
>>   	init_wait(&wait);
>>   	prepare_to_wait(&pool->wait, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
Thanks
Zhiguo

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.