Re: [PATCH 01/18] lib/stackdepot: fix setting next_slab_inited in init_stack_slab

From: Andrey Konovalov
Date: Tue Jan 31 2023 - 14:00:18 EST


On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 10:30 AM Alexander Potapenko <glider@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Wait, I think there's a problem here.
>
> > diff --git a/lib/stackdepot.c b/lib/stackdepot.c
> > index 79e894cf8406..0eed9bbcf23e 100644
> > --- a/lib/stackdepot.c
> > +++ b/lib/stackdepot.c
> > @@ -105,12 +105,13 @@ static bool init_stack_slab(void **prealloc)
> > if (depot_index + 1 < STACK_ALLOC_MAX_SLABS) {
> If we get to this branch, but the condition is false, this means that:
> - next_slab_inited == 0
> - depot_index == STACK_ALLOC_MAX_SLABS+1
> - stack_slabs[depot_index] != NULL.
>
> So stack_slabs[] is at full capacity, but upon leaving
> init_stack_slab() we'll always keep next_slab_inited==0.
>
> Now every time __stack_depot_save() is called for a known stack trace,
> it will preallocate 1<<STACK_ALLOC_ORDER pages (because
> next_slab_inited==0), then find the stack trace id in the hash, then
> pass the preallocated pages to init_stack_slab(), which will not
> change the value of next_slab_inited.
> Then the preallocated pages will be freed, and next time
> __stack_depot_save() is called they'll be allocated again.

Ah, right, missed that.

What do you think about renaming next_slab_inited to
next_slab_required and inverting the used values (0/1 -> 1/0)? This
would make this part of code less confusing.