| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 09:21:28 +0800
From: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"aarcange@...hat.com" <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, mel <mel@....ul.ie>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 5/5]thp: split huge page if head page is isolated
On Sat, 2011-10-29 at 08:06 +0800, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:59:40AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > With current logic, if page reclaim finds a huge page, it will just reclaim
> > the head page and leave tail pages reclaimed later. Let's take an example,
> > lru list has page A and B, page A is huge page:
> > 1. page A is isolated
> > 2. page B is isolated
> > 3. shrink_page_list() adds page A to swap page cache. so page A is split.
> > page A+1, page A+2, ... are added to lru list.
> > 4. shrink_page_list() adds page B to swap page cache.
> > 5. page A and B is written out and reclaimed.
> > 6. page A+1, A+2 ... is isolated and reclaimed later.
> > So the reclaim order is A, B, ...(maybe other pages), A+1, A+2 ...
> >
> > We expected the whole huge page A is reclaimed in the meantime, so
> > the order is A, A+1, ... A+HPAGE_PMD_NR-1, B, ....
> >
> > With this patch, we do huge page split just after the head page is isolated
> > for inactive lru list, so the tail pages will be reclaimed immediately.
> >
> > In a test, a range of anonymous memory is written and will trigger swap.
> > Without the patch:
> > #cat /proc/vmstat|grep thp
> > thp_fault_alloc 451
> > thp_fault_fallback 0
> > thp_collapse_alloc 0
> > thp_collapse_alloc_failed 0
> > thp_split 238
> >
> > With the patch:
> > #cat /proc/vmstat|grep thp
> > thp_fault_alloc 450
> > thp_fault_fallback 1
> > thp_collapse_alloc 0
> > thp_collapse_alloc_failed 0
> > thp_split 103
> >
> > So the thp_split number is reduced a lot, though there is one extra
> > thp_fault_fallback.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
> > ---
> > include/linux/memcontrol.h | 3 +-
> > mm/memcontrol.c | 12 +++++++++--
> > mm/vmscan.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: linux/mm/vmscan.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux.orig/mm/vmscan.c 2011-10-25 08:36:08.000000000 +0800
> > +++ linux/mm/vmscan.c 2011-10-25 09:51:44.000000000 +0800
> > @@ -1076,7 +1076,8 @@ int __isolate_lru_page(struct page *page
> > */
> > static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> > struct list_head *src, struct list_head *dst,
> > - unsigned long *scanned, int order, int mode, int file)
> > + unsigned long *scanned, int order, int mode, int file,
> > + struct page **split_page)
> > {
> > unsigned long nr_taken = 0;
> > unsigned long nr_lumpy_taken = 0;
> > @@ -1100,7 +1101,12 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(u
> > case 0:
> > list_move(&page->lru, dst);
> > mem_cgroup_del_lru(page);
> > - nr_taken += hpage_nr_pages(page);
> > + if (PageTransHuge(page) && split_page) {
> > + nr_taken++;
> > + *split_page = page;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else
> > + nr_taken += hpage_nr_pages(page);
> > break;
> >
> > case -EBUSY:
> > @@ -1158,11 +1164,16 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(u
> > if (__isolate_lru_page(cursor_page, mode, file) == 0) {
> > list_move(&cursor_page->lru, dst);
> > mem_cgroup_del_lru(cursor_page);
> > - nr_taken += hpage_nr_pages(page);
> > nr_lumpy_taken++;
> > if (PageDirty(cursor_page))
> > nr_lumpy_dirty++;
> > scan++;
> > + if (PageTransHuge(page) && split_page) {
> > + nr_taken++;
> > + *split_page = page;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else
> > + nr_taken += hpage_nr_pages(page);
> > } else {
> > /*
> > * Check if the page is freed already.
> > @@ -1188,6 +1199,7 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(u
> > nr_lumpy_failed++;
> > }
> >
> > +out:
> > *scanned = scan;
> >
> > trace_mm_vmscan_lru_isolate(order,
> > @@ -1202,7 +1214,8 @@ static unsigned long isolate_pages_globa
> > struct list_head *dst,
> > unsigned long *scanned, int order,
> > int mode, struct zone *z,
> > - int active, int file)
> > + int active, int file,
> > + struct page **split_page)
> > {
> > int lru = LRU_BASE;
> > if (active)
> > @@ -1210,7 +1223,7 @@ static unsigned long isolate_pages_globa
> > if (file)
> > lru += LRU_FILE;
> > return isolate_lru_pages(nr, &z->lru[lru].list, dst, scanned, order,
> > - mode, file);
> > + mode, file, split_page);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -1444,10 +1457,12 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to
> > {
> > LIST_HEAD(page_list);
> > unsigned long nr_scanned;
> > + unsigned long total_scanned = 0;
> > unsigned long nr_reclaimed = 0;
> > unsigned long nr_taken;
> > unsigned long nr_anon;
> > unsigned long nr_file;
> > + struct page *split_page;
> >
> > while (unlikely(too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc))) {
> > congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
> > @@ -1458,16 +1473,19 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to
> > }
> >
> > set_reclaim_mode(priority, sc, false);
> > +again:
> > lru_add_drain();
> > + split_page = NULL;
> > spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> >
> > if (scanning_global_lru(sc)) {
> > - nr_taken = isolate_pages_global(nr_to_scan,
> > + nr_taken = isolate_pages_global(nr_to_scan - total_scanned,
> > &page_list, &nr_scanned, sc->order,
> > sc->reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM ?
> > ISOLATE_BOTH : ISOLATE_INACTIVE,
> > - zone, 0, file);
> > + zone, 0, file, &split_page);
> > zone->pages_scanned += nr_scanned;
> > + total_scanned += nr_scanned;
> > if (current_is_kswapd())
> > __count_zone_vm_events(PGSCAN_KSWAPD, zone,
> > nr_scanned);
> > @@ -1475,12 +1493,13 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to
> > __count_zone_vm_events(PGSCAN_DIRECT, zone,
> > nr_scanned);
> > } else {
> > - nr_taken = mem_cgroup_isolate_pages(nr_to_scan,
> > + nr_taken = mem_cgroup_isolate_pages(nr_to_scan - total_scanned,
> > &page_list, &nr_scanned, sc->order,
> > sc->reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM ?
> > ISOLATE_BOTH : ISOLATE_INACTIVE,
> > zone, sc->mem_cgroup,
> > - 0, file);
> > + 0, file, &split_page);
> > + total_scanned += nr_scanned;
> > /*
> > * mem_cgroup_isolate_pages() keeps track of
> > * scanned pages on its own.
> > @@ -1491,11 +1510,19 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to
> > spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> > return 0;
> > }
> > + if (split_page && total_scanned < nr_to_scan) {
> > + spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> > + split_huge_page(split_page);
> > + goto again;
> > + }
> >
> > update_isolated_counts(zone, sc, &nr_anon, &nr_file, &page_list);
> >
> > spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> >
> > + if (split_page)
> > + split_huge_page(split_page);
> > +
> > nr_reclaimed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, zone, sc);
> >
> > /* Check if we should syncronously wait for writeback */
> > @@ -1589,13 +1616,13 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned
> > nr_taken = isolate_pages_global(nr_pages, &l_hold,
> > &pgscanned, sc->order,
> > ISOLATE_ACTIVE, zone,
> > - 1, file);
> > + 1, file, NULL);
> > zone->pages_scanned += pgscanned;
> > } else {
> > nr_taken = mem_cgroup_isolate_pages(nr_pages, &l_hold,
> > &pgscanned, sc->order,
> > ISOLATE_ACTIVE, zone,
> > - sc->mem_cgroup, 1, file);
> > + sc->mem_cgroup, 1, file, NULL);
> > /*
> > * mem_cgroup_isolate_pages() keeps track of
> > * scanned pages on its own.
> > Index: linux/mm/memcontrol.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux.orig/mm/memcontrol.c 2011-10-25 08:36:08.000000000 +0800
> > +++ linux/mm/memcontrol.c 2011-10-25 09:33:51.000000000 +0800
> > @@ -1187,7 +1187,8 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_isolate_pages(u
> > unsigned long *scanned, int order,
> > int mode, struct zone *z,
> > struct mem_cgroup *mem_cont,
> > - int active, int file)
> > + int active, int file,
> > + struct page **split_page)
> > {
> > unsigned long nr_taken = 0;
> > struct page *page;
> > @@ -1224,7 +1225,13 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_isolate_pages(u
> > case 0:
> > list_move(&page->lru, dst);
> > mem_cgroup_del_lru(page);
> > - nr_taken += hpage_nr_pages(page);
> > + if (PageTransHuge(page) && split_page) {
> > + nr_taken++;
> > + *split_page = page;
> > + goto out;
> > + } else
> > + nr_taken += hpage_nr_pages(page);
> > +
> > break;
> > case -EBUSY:
> > /* we don't affect global LRU but rotate in our LRU */
> > @@ -1235,6 +1242,7 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_isolate_pages(u
> > }
> > }
> >
> > +out:
> > *scanned = scan;
> >
> > trace_mm_vmscan_memcg_isolate(0, nr_to_scan, scan, nr_taken,
> > Index: linux/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux.orig/include/linux/memcontrol.h 2011-10-25 08:36:08.000000000 +0800
> > +++ linux/include/linux/memcontrol.h 2011-10-25 09:33:51.000000000 +0800
> > @@ -37,7 +37,8 @@ extern unsigned long mem_cgroup_isolate_
> > unsigned long *scanned, int order,
> > int mode, struct zone *z,
> > struct mem_cgroup *mem_cont,
> > - int active, int file);
> > + int active, int file,
> > + struct page **split_page);
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_MEM_RES_CTLR
> > /*
> >
> >
>
> I saw the code. my concern is your patch could make unnecessary split of THP.
>
> When we isolates page, we can't know whether it's working set or not.
> So split should happen after we judge it's working set page.
yes, but since memory is big currently, it's unlikely the isolated page
get accessed in the window. And I only did the split in
shrink_inactive_list, not in active list.
And THP has mechanism to collapse small pages to huge page later.
> If you really want to merge this patch, I suggest that
> we can handle it in shrink_page_list step, not isolation step.
>
> My totally untested code which is just to show the concept is as follows,
I did consider this option before. It has its problem too. The isolation
can isolate several huge page one time. And then later shrink_page_list
can swap several huge page one time, which is unfortunate. I'm pretty
sure this method can't reduce the thp_split count in my test. It could
be helpful when pages are heavily rotated, but this means page reclaim
is already broken, which is rare case.
--
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