mm, slab: Match SLAB and SLUB kmem_cache_alloc_xxx_trace() prototype

This long (seemingly unnecessary) patch does not fix anything and
its only goal is to produce common code between SLAB and SLUB.

Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
mm, slab: Rename __cache_alloc() -> slab_alloc()

This patch does not fix anything and its only goal is to
produce common code between SLAB and SLUB.

Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
mm/slab: Fix typo _RET_IP -> _RET_IP_

The bug was introduced by commit 7c0cb9c64f83 ("mm, slab: Replace
'caller' type, void* -> unsigned long").

Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
mm/slab: Fix kmem_cache_alloc_node_trace() declaration

The bug was introduced in commit 4052147c0afa ("mm, slab: Match SLAB
and SLUB kmem_cache_alloc_xxx_trace() prototype").

Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Revert "mm/slab: Fix kmem_cache_alloc_node_trace() declaration"

This reverts commit 1e5965bf1f018cc30a4659fa3f1a40146e4276f6. Ezequiel
Garcia has a better fix.
slab: Fix build failure in __kmem_cache_create()

Fix build failure with CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB=y && CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=y caused
by commit 8a13a4cc "mm/sl[aou]b: Shrink __kmem_cache_create() parameter lists".

mm/slab.c: In function '__kmem_cache_create':
mm/slab.c:2474: error: 'align' undeclared (first use in this function)
mm/slab.c:2474: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
mm/slab.c:2474: error: for each function it appears in.)
make[1]: *** [mm/slab.o] Error 1
make: *** [mm] Error 2

Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
mm, slab: release slab_mutex earlier in kmem_cache_destroy()

Commit 1331e7a1bbe1 ("rcu: Remove _rcu_barrier() dependency on
__stop_machine()") introduced slab_mutex -> cpu_hotplug.lock dependency
through kmem_cache_destroy() -> rcu_barrier() -> _rcu_barrier() ->
get_online_cpus().

Lockdep thinks that this might actually result in ABBA deadlock,
and reports it as below:

=== [ cut here ] ===
 ======================================================
 [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
 3.6.0-rc5-00004-g0d8ee37 #143 Not tainted
 -------------------------------------------------------
 kworker/u:2/40 is trying to acquire lock:
  (rcu_sched_state.barrier_mutex){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff810f2126>] _rcu_barrier+0x26/0x1e0

 but task is already holding lock:
  (slab_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81176e15>] kmem_cache_destroy+0x45/0xe0

 which lock already depends on the new lock.

 the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

 -> #2 (slab_mutex){+.+.+.}:
        [<ffffffff810ae1e2>] validate_chain+0x632/0x720
        [<ffffffff810ae5d9>] __lock_acquire+0x309/0x530
        [<ffffffff810ae921>] lock_acquire+0x121/0x190
        [<ffffffff8155d4cc>] __mutex_lock_common+0x5c/0x450
        [<ffffffff8155d9ee>] mutex_lock_nested+0x3e/0x50
        [<ffffffff81558cb5>] cpuup_callback+0x2f/0xbe
        [<ffffffff81564b83>] notifier_call_chain+0x93/0x140
        [<ffffffff81076f89>] __raw_notifier_call_chain+0x9/0x10
        [<ffffffff8155719d>] _cpu_up+0xba/0x14e
        [<ffffffff815572ed>] cpu_up+0xbc/0x117
        [<ffffffff81ae05e3>] smp_init+0x6b/0x9f
        [<ffffffff81ac47d6>] kernel_init+0x147/0x1dc
        [<ffffffff8156ab44>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10

 -> #1 (cpu_hotplug.lock){+.+.+.}:
        [<ffffffff810ae1e2>] validate_chain+0x632/0x720
        [<ffffffff810ae5d9>] __lock_acquire+0x309/0x530
        [<ffffffff810ae921>] lock_acquire+0x121/0x190
        [<ffffffff8155d4cc>] __mutex_lock_common+0x5c/0x450
        [<ffffffff8155d9ee>] mutex_lock_nested+0x3e/0x50
        [<ffffffff81049197>] get_online_cpus+0x37/0x50
        [<ffffffff810f21bb>] _rcu_barrier+0xbb/0x1e0
        [<ffffffff810f22f0>] rcu_barrier_sched+0x10/0x20
        [<ffffffff810f2309>] rcu_barrier+0x9/0x10
        [<ffffffff8118c129>] deactivate_locked_super+0x49/0x90
        [<ffffffff8118cc01>] deactivate_super+0x61/0x70
        [<ffffffff811aaaa7>] mntput_no_expire+0x127/0x180
        [<ffffffff811ab49e>] sys_umount+0x6e/0xd0
        [<ffffffff81569979>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

 -> #0 (rcu_sched_state.barrier_mutex){+.+...}:
        [<ffffffff810adb4e>] check_prev_add+0x3de/0x440
        [<ffffffff810ae1e2>] validate_chain+0x632/0x720
        [<ffffffff810ae5d9>] __lock_acquire+0x309/0x530
        [<ffffffff810ae921>] lock_acquire+0x121/0x190
        [<ffffffff8155d4cc>] __mutex_lock_common+0x5c/0x450
        [<ffffffff8155d9ee>] mutex_lock_nested+0x3e/0x50
        [<ffffffff810f2126>] _rcu_barrier+0x26/0x1e0
        [<ffffffff810f22f0>] rcu_barrier_sched+0x10/0x20
        [<ffffffff810f2309>] rcu_barrier+0x9/0x10
        [<ffffffff81176ea1>] kmem_cache_destroy+0xd1/0xe0
        [<ffffffffa04c3154>] nf_conntrack_cleanup_net+0xe4/0x110 [nf_conntrack]
        [<ffffffffa04c31aa>] nf_conntrack_cleanup+0x2a/0x70 [nf_conntrack]
        [<ffffffffa04c42ce>] nf_conntrack_net_exit+0x5e/0x80 [nf_conntrack]
        [<ffffffff81454b79>] ops_exit_list+0x39/0x60
        [<ffffffff814551ab>] cleanup_net+0xfb/0x1b0
        [<ffffffff8106917b>] process_one_work+0x26b/0x4c0
        [<ffffffff81069f3e>] worker_thread+0x12e/0x320
        [<ffffffff8106f73e>] kthread+0x9e/0xb0
        [<ffffffff8156ab44>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10

 other info that might help us debug this:

 Chain exists of:
   rcu_sched_state.barrier_mutex --> cpu_hotplug.lock --> slab_mutex

  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

        CPU0                    CPU1
        ----                    ----
   lock(slab_mutex);
                                lock(cpu_hotplug.lock);
                                lock(slab_mutex);
   lock(rcu_sched_state.barrier_mutex);

  *** DEADLOCK ***
=== [ cut here ] ===

This is actually a false positive. Lockdep has no way of knowing the fact
that the ABBA can actually never happen, because of special semantics of
cpu_hotplug.refcount and its handling in cpu_hotplug_begin(); the mutual
exclusion there is not achieved through mutex, but through
cpu_hotplug.refcount.

The "neither cpu_up() nor cpu_down() will proceed past cpu_hotplug_begin()
until everyone who called get_online_cpus() will call put_online_cpus()"
semantics is totally invisible to lockdep.

This patch therefore moves the unlock of slab_mutex so that rcu_barrier()
is being called with it unlocked. It has two advantages:

- it slightly reduces hold time of slab_mutex; as it's used to protect
  the cachep list, it's not necessary to hold it over kmem_cache_free()
  call any more
- it silences the lockdep false positive warning, as it avoids lockdep ever
  learning about slab_mutex -> cpu_hotplug.lock dependency

Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
mm/sl[au]b: Move slabinfo processing to slab_common.c

This patch moves all the common machinery to slabinfo processing
to slab_common.c. We can do better by noticing that the output is
heavily common, and having the allocators to just provide finished
information about this. But after this first step, this can be done
easier.

Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
CC: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>