Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:00:17 -0700
From:      Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
To:        Scott Long <scott4long@yahoo.com>
Cc:        Chagin Dmitry <dchagin@freebsd.org>,  "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>,  "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>,  "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r281451 - head/sys/vm
Message-ID:  <CAJ-VmonQdnkLEhspj120bPMGO9PbVJv7vkNVVt%2B42viSNwL1Ww@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <FFE5F8D2-A15E-4087-93F5-3640662217DD@yahoo.com>
References:  <201504120621.t3C6LxAV095209@svn.freebsd.org> <5B48434B-EA97-45B3-BC4E-B039A868186B@yahoo.com> <4E109480-FD27-4C7F-8B5F-B1DB2232CD3D@yahoo.com> <20150423192819.GA13122@dchagin.static.corbina.net> <FFE5F8D2-A15E-4087-93F5-3640662217DD@yahoo.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 23 April 2015 at 22:26, Scott Long <scott4long@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 23, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Chagin Dmitry <dchagin@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:49:51PM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Apr 23, 2015, at 6:19 AM, Scott Long <scott4long@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 12, 2015, at 12:21 AM, Dmitry Chagin <dchagin@FreeBSD.org> wro=
te:
>>>>>
>>>>> Author: dchagin
>>>>> Date: Sun Apr 12 06:21:58 2015
>>>>> New Revision: 281451
>>>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/281451
>>>>>
>>>>> Log:
>>>>> Rework r281162. Indeed, the flexible array member is preferable here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggested by:   Justin T. Gibbs
>>>>>
>>>>> MFC after: 3 days
>>>>>
>>>>> Modified:
>>>>> head/sys/vm/uma_core.c
>>>>> head/sys/vm/uma_int.h
>>>>
>>>> There???s still something wrong with this.  I have a machine with 28 c=
ores (56 with hyperthreading) and 256GB of RAM, and ever since you committe=
d r281162, it panics early in boot with a failed assertion.  It looks like =
the first few members of a uma_slab_t are getting overwritten accidentally,=
 and somehow the padding of the extra member in the uma_zone_t was previous=
ly protecting it.  I don???t know the exact cause yet, but I must ask that =
you revert to r281161 in HEAD and stable/10 until the problem is resolved.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think the problem is that the masterzone_k and masterzone_z objects t=
hat are statically allocated in uma_core.c no longer have space for the uz_=
cpu field, but uma_zalloc_arg() always assumes that it???s there.  Early in=
 boot when the ???kegs' and ???zones??? zones are being initialized, there?=
??s only 1 CPU so pre-allocating 1 uz_cpu element in the uma_zone is enough=
.  I can???t see any way around this without significantly changing how uma=
_zalloc_arg() treats per-cpu caches.  I think it???s best to revert this ch=
ange.
>>>
>> Hi,
>> they initialized in uma_startup() and not used before.
>> I have a private converstion with a man which stable/10 hangs in vm_mem_=
init().\
>> with my commit. weird.
>>
>> I do not object to revert, but give me a chance to figure out what's goi=
ng on.
>
> With INVARIANTS enabled, the system will panic.  Without it, it will spin=
 in vm_mem_init(), as you noted.  Even if it=E2=80=99s not happening to eve=
ryone, it=E2=80=99s a serious problem for such a minor anticipated benefit.=
  I must insist that it be reverted.


Hi,

+1 - please revert the patch for now and figure it out locally. Having
-HEAD broken is very annoying.



-a



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmonQdnkLEhspj120bPMGO9PbVJv7vkNVVt%2B42viSNwL1Ww>