lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:21:11 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <>
To:	Christoph Lameter <>,
	Andi Kleen <>
	Tejun Heo <>, Ingo Molnar <>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: Subject: [RFC MM] mmap_sem scaling: Use mutex and percpu counter instead

> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 12:08:54PM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes but all the major calls still take mmap_sem, which is not ranged.
> > >
> > > But exactly that issue is addressed by this patch!
> >
> > Major calls = mmap, brk, etc.
> Those are rare. More frequently are for faults, get_user_pages and
> the like operations that are frequent.
> brk depends on process wide settings and has to be
> serialized using a processor wide locks.
> mmap and other address space local modification may be able to avoid
> taking mmap write lock by taking the read lock and then locking the
> ptls in the page struct relevant to the address space being modified.
> This is also enabled by this patchset.

Andi, Why do you ignore fork? fork() hold mmap_sem write-side lock and
it is one of critical path.
Ah yes, I know HPC workload doesn't call fork() so frequently, I mean
typical desktop and small server case.

I agree with cristoph halfly. if the issue is only in mmap, it isn't
so important.

Probably, I haven't catch your mention.

Plus, most critical mmap_sem issue is not locking cost itself. In stree workload,
the procss grabbing mmap_sem frequently sleep. and fair rw-semaphoe logic
frequently prevent reader side locking.
At least, this improvement doesn't help google like workload.


> > Only for page faults, not for anything that takes it for write.
> >
> > Anyways the better reader lock is a step in the right direction, but
> > I have my doubts it's a good idea to make write really slow here.
> The bigger the system the larger the problems with mmap. This is one key
> scaling issue important for the VM. We can work on that. I have a patch
> here that restricts the per cpu checks to only those cpus on which the
> process has at some times run before.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists