# Phase 7: 4T High-Contention Stability Verification Report

**Date**: 2025-11-08
**Tester**: Claude Task Agent
**Build**: HEADER_CLASSIDX=1 AGGRESSIVE_INLINE=1 PREWARM_TLS=1
**Test Scope**: Verify fixes from other AI (Superslab Fail-Fast + wrapper fixes)

---

## Executive Summary

**Verdict**: ❌ **NOT FIXED** (Potentially WORSE)

| Metric | Result | Status |
|--------|--------|--------|
| **Success Rate** | 30% (6/20) | ❌ Worse than before (35%) |
| **Throughput** | 981,138 ops/s (when working) | ✅ Stable |
| **Production Ready** | NO | ❌ Unsafe for deployment |
| **Root Cause** | Mixed HAKMEM/libc allocations | ⚠️ Still present |

**Key Finding**: The Fail-Fast guards did NOT catch any corruption. The crash is caused by "free(): invalid pointer" when malloc fallback is triggered, not by internal corruption.

---

## 1. Stability Test Results (20 runs)

### Summary Statistics

```
Success: 6/20 (30%)
Failure: 14/20 (70%)
Average Throughput: 981,138 ops/s
Throughput Range: 981,087 - 981,190 ops/s
```

### Comparison with Previous Results

| Metric | Before Fixes | After Fixes | Change |
|--------|--------------|-------------|--------|
| Success Rate | 35% (7/20) | **30% (6/20)** | **-5% ❌** |
| Throughput | 981K ops/s | 981K ops/s | 0% |
| 1T Baseline | Unknown | 2,737K ops/s | ✅ OK |
| 2T | Unknown | 4,905K ops/s | ✅ OK |
| 4T Low-Contention | Unknown | 251K ops/s | ⚠️ Slow |

**Conclusion**: The fixes did NOT improve stability. Success rate is slightly worse.

---

## 2. Detailed Test Results

### Success Runs (6/20)

| Run | Throughput | Variation |
|-----|-----------|-----------|
| 3 | 981,189 ops/s | +0.005% |
| 4 | 981,087 ops/s | baseline |
| 7 | 981,087 ops/s | baseline |
| 14 | 981,190 ops/s | +0.010% |
| 15 | 981,087 ops/s | baseline |
| 17 | 981,190 ops/s | +0.010% |

**Observation**: When it works, throughput is extremely stable (±0.01%).

### Failure Runs (14/20)

All failures follow this pattern:

```
1. [DEBUG] Phase 7: tiny_alloc(X) rejected, using malloc fallback
2. free(): invalid pointer
3. [DEBUG] superslab_refill returned NULL (OOM) detail: class=X
4. Core dump (exit code 134)
```

**Common failure classes**: 1, 4, 6 (sizes: 16B, 64B, 512B)

**Pattern**: OOM in specific classes → malloc fallback → mixed allocation → crash

---

## 3. Fail-Fast Guard Results

### Test Configuration
- `HAKMEM_TINY_REFILL_FAILFAST=2` (maximum validation)
- Guards check freelist head bounds and meta->used overflow

### Results (5 runs)

| Run | Outcome | Corruption Detected? |
|-----|---------|---------------------|
| 1 | Crash (exit 1) | ❌ No `[ALLOC_CORRUPT]` |
| 2 | Crash (exit 1) | ❌ No `[ALLOC_CORRUPT]` |
| 3 | Crash (exit 1) | ❌ No `[ALLOC_CORRUPT]` |
| 4 | Success (981K ops/s) | ✅ N/A |
| 5 | Success (981K ops/s) | ✅ N/A |

**Critical Finding**:
- **Zero detections** of freelist corruption or metadata overflow
- Crashes still happen with guards enabled
- Guards are working correctly but NOT catching the root cause

**Interpretation**: The bug is NOT in superslab allocation logic. The Fail-Fast guards are correct but irrelevant to this crash.

---

## 4. Performance Analysis

### Low-Contention Regression Check

| Test | Throughput | Status |
|------|-----------|--------|
| 1T baseline | 2,736,909 ops/s | ✅ No regression |
| 2T | 4,905,303 ops/s | ✅ No regression |
| 4T @ 256 chunks | 251,314 ops/s | ⚠️ Significantly slower |

**Observation**:
- Low contention (1T, 2T) works perfectly
- 4T with low allocation count (256 chunks) is very slow but stable
- 4T with high allocation count (1024 chunks) crashes 70% of the time

### Throughput Consistency

When the benchmark completes successfully:
- Mean: 981,138 ops/s
- Stddev: 46 ops/s (±0.005%)
- **Extremely stable**, suggesting no race conditions in the hot path

---

## 5. Root Cause Assessment

### What the Other AI Fixed

1. **Superslab Fail-Fast strengthening** (`core/tiny_superslab_alloc.inc.h`):
   - Added freelist head index/capacity validation
   - Added meta->used overflow detection
   - **Impact**: Zero (guards never trigger)

2. **Wrapper fixes** (`core/hakmem.c`):
   - `g_hakmem_lock_depth` recursion guard
   - **Impact**: Unknown (not directly related to this crash)

### Why the Fixes Didn't Work

**The guards are protecting against the wrong bug.**

The actual crash sequence:

```
Thread 1: Allocates class 6 blocks → depletes superslab
Thread 2: Allocates class 6 → superslab_refill() → OOM (bitmap=0x00000000)
Thread 2: Falls back to malloc() → mixed allocation
Thread 3: Frees class 6 block → tries to free malloc() pointer → "invalid pointer"
```

**Root Cause**:
- **Superslab starvation** under high contention
- **Malloc fallback mixing** creates allocation ownership chaos
- **No registry tracking** for malloc-allocated blocks

### Evidence

From failure logs:
```
[DEBUG] superslab_refill returned NULL (OOM) detail:
  class=6 prev_ss=(nil) active=0 bitmap=0x00000000
  prev_meta=(nil) used=0 cap=0 slab_idx=0
  reused_freelist=0 free_idx=-2 errno=12
```

**Interpretation**:
- `bitmap=0x00000000`: All 32 slabs are empty (no freelist blocks)
- `prev_ss=(nil)`: No previous superslab to reuse
- `errno=12`: Out of memory (ENOMEM)
- Result: Falls back to `malloc()`, creates mixed allocation

---

## 6. Remaining Issues

### Primary Bug: Mixed Allocation Chaos

**Problem**: HAKMEM and libc malloc allocations get mixed, causing free() failures.

**Trigger**: High-contention workload depletes superslabs → malloc fallback

**Frequency**: 70% (14/20 runs)

### Secondary Issue: Superslab Starvation

**Problem**: Under high contention, all 32 slabs in a superslab become empty simultaneously.

**Evidence**: `bitmap=0x00000000` in all failure logs

**Implication**: Need better superslab provisioning or dynamic scaling

### Fail-Fast Guards: Working but Irrelevant

**Status**: ✅ Guards are correctly implemented and NOT triggering

**Conclusion**: The guards protect against corruption that isn't happening. The real bug is architectural (mixed allocations).

---

## 7. Production Readiness Assessment

### Recommendation: **DO NOT DEPLOY**

| Criterion | Status | Reasoning |
|-----------|--------|-----------|
| **Stability** | ❌ FAIL | 70% crash rate in 4T workloads |
| **Correctness** | ❌ FAIL | Mixed allocations cause corruption |
| **Performance** | ✅ PASS | When working, throughput is excellent |
| **Safety** | ❌ FAIL | No way to distinguish HAKMEM/libc allocations |

### Safe Configurations

**Only use HAKMEM for**:
- Single-threaded workloads ✅
- Low-contention multi-threaded (≤2T) ✅
- Fixed allocation sizes (no malloc fallback) ⚠️

**DO NOT use for**:
- High-contention multi-threaded (4T+) ❌
- Production systems requiring stability ❌
- Mixed HAKMEM/libc allocation scenarios ❌

### Known Limitations

1. **4T high-contention**: 70% crash rate
2. **Malloc fallback**: Causes invalid free() errors
3. **Superslab starvation**: No recovery mechanism
4. **Class 1, 4, 6**: Most prone to OOM (small sizes, high churn)

---

## 8. Next Steps

### Immediate Actions (Required before production)

1. **Fix Mixed Allocation Bug** (CRITICAL)
   - Option A: Track all allocations in a global registry (memory overhead)
   - Option B: Add header to all allocations (8-16 bytes overhead)
   - Option C: Disable malloc fallback entirely (fail-fast on OOM)

2. **Fix Superslab Starvation** (CRITICAL)
   - Dynamic superslab scaling (allocate new superslab on OOM)
   - Better superslab provisioning strategy
   - Per-thread superslab affinity to reduce contention

3. **Add Allocation Ownership Detection** (CRITICAL)
   - Prevent free(malloc_ptr) from HAKMEM allocator
   - Add magic header or bitmap to distinguish allocation sources

### Long-Term Improvements

1. **Better Contention Handling**
   - Lock-free refill paths
   - Per-core superslab caches
   - Adaptive batch sizes based on contention

2. **Memory Pressure Handling**
   - Graceful degradation on OOM
   - Spill-to-system-malloc with proper tracking
   - Memory reclamation from cold classes

3. **Comprehensive Testing**
   - Stress test with varying thread counts (1-16T)
   - Long-duration stability testing (hours, not seconds)
   - Memory leak detection (Valgrind, ASan)

---

## 9. Comparison Table

| Metric | Before Fixes | After Fixes | Change |
|--------|--------------|-------------|--------|
| **Success Rate** | 35% (7/20) | 30% (6/20) | **-5% ❌** |
| **Throughput** | 981K ops/s | 981K ops/s | 0% |
| **1T Regression** | Unknown | 2,737K ops/s | ✅ OK |
| **2T Regression** | Unknown | 4,905K ops/s | ✅ OK |
| **4T Low-Contention** | Unknown | 251K ops/s | ⚠️ Slow but stable |
| **Fail-Fast Triggers** | Unknown | 0 | ✅ No corruption detected |

---

## 10. Conclusion

**The 4T high-contention crash is NOT fixed.**

The other AI's fixes (Fail-Fast guards and wrapper improvements) are correct and valuable for catching future bugs, but they do NOT address the root cause of this crash:

**Root Cause**: Superslab starvation → malloc fallback → mixed allocations → invalid free()

**Next Priority**: Fix the mixed allocation bug (Option C: disable malloc fallback and fail-fast on OOM is the safest short-term solution).

**Production Status**: UNSAFE. Do not deploy for high-contention workloads.

---

## Appendix: Test Environment

**System**:
- OS: Linux 6.8.0-65-generic
- CPU: Native architecture (march=native)
- Compiler: gcc with -O3 -flto

**Build Flags**:
- `HEADER_CLASSIDX=1`
- `AGGRESSIVE_INLINE=1`
- `PREWARM_TLS=1`
- `HAKMEM_TINY_PHASE6_BOX_REFACTOR=1`

**Test Command**:
```bash
./larson_hakmem 10 8 128 1024 1 12345 4
```

**Parameters**:
- 10 iterations
- 8 threads (4T due to doubling)
- 128 min object size
- 1024 max objects per thread
- Seed: 12345
- 4 threads

**Runtime**: ~17 minutes per successful run

---

**Report Generated**: 2025-11-08
**Verified By**: Claude Task Agent