lists.openwall.net   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  linux-cve-announce  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]
Message-ID: <4CD5C1D9.7050509@cs.columbia.edu>
Date:	Sat, 06 Nov 2010 17:00:09 -0400
From:	Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>
To:	Gene Cooperman <gene@....neu.edu>
CC:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, Kapil Arya <kapil@....neu.edu>,
	"ksummit-2010-discuss@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
	<ksummit-2010-discuss@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2010-discuss] checkpoint-restart: naked patch



On 11/05/2010 01:17 PM, Gene Cooperman wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 04:57:33AM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
>>> Oren noted that sometimes it's important to stop the process only
>>> for a few milliseconds while one checkpoints. In DMTCP, we do that
>>> by configuring with --enable-forked-checkpointing. This causes us
>>> to fork a child process taking advantage of copy-on-write and then
>>> checkpoint the memory pages of the child while the parent continues
>>> to execute.
>>
>> Interesting ... but while the process is only stopped for the duration
>> of the fork, it may be taking COW faults on almost every page it
>> touches.  I think this will not work well for large HPC applications
>> that allocate most of physical memory as anonymous pages for the
>> application. It may even result in an OOM kill if you don't complete
>> the checkpoint of the child and have it exit in a timely manner.
>>
>> -Tony
>>
> 
> I agree with you that forked checkpointing is probably not what you
> want in the middle of an HPC computation.  But isn't that part of
> the nature of COW?  Whether the COW is invoked within the kernel,
> or from outside the kernel via fork --- in either case, when you have
> mostly dirty pages, you will have to copy most of the pages.
> Do I understand your point correctly?			Thanks,
> 							- Gene

COW is one way of reducing down time (whether through fork or
in-kernel checkpoint). However, it is possible to avoid using
it (and thus avoid extra page faults and memory overload) by
using the page-table "dirty" bit to track dirty pages. This way
one can "pre-copy" the checkpoint image while the application is
running, without additional overhead (the idea is similar to how
live-migration is done).

Oren.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ