linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 10/12] thp: implement refcounting for huge zero page

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: <20121119110935.GA24372@shutemov.name>
Date:	Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:09:35 +0200
From:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To:	Jaegeuk Hanse <jaegeuk.hanse@...il.com>
Cc:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 10/12] thp: implement refcounting for huge zero page

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 07:02:22PM +0800, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
> On 11/19/2012 06:23 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> >On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 06:20:01PM +0800, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
> >>On 11/19/2012 05:56 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> >>>On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 02:23:44PM +0800, Jaegeuk Hanse wrote:
> >>>>On 11/16/2012 03:27 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> >>>>>From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>H. Peter Anvin doesn't like huge zero page which sticks in memory forever
> >>>>>after the first allocation. Here's implementation of lockless refcounting
> >>>>>for huge zero page.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>We have two basic primitives: {get,put}_huge_zero_page(). They
> >>>>>manipulate reference counter.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>If counter is 0, get_huge_zero_page() allocates a new huge page and
> >>>>>takes two references: one for caller and one for shrinker. We free the
> >>>>>page only in shrinker callback if counter is 1 (only shrinker has the
> >>>>>reference).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>put_huge_zero_page() only decrements counter. Counter is never zero
> >>>>>in put_huge_zero_page() since shrinker holds on reference.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Freeing huge zero page in shrinker callback helps to avoid frequent
> >>>>>allocate-free.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Refcounting has cost. On 4 socket machine I observe ~1% slowdown on
> >>>>>parallel (40 processes) read page faulting comparing to lazy huge page
> >>>>>allocation.  I think it's pretty reasonable for synthetic benchmark.
> >>>>Hi Kirill,
> >>>>
> >>>>I see your and Andew's hot discussion in v4 resend thread.
> >>>>
> >>>>"I also tried another scenario: usemem -n16 100M -r 1000. It creates
> >>>>real memory pressure - no easy reclaimable memory. This time
> >>>>callback called with nr_to_scan > 0 and we freed hzp. "
> >>>>
> >>>>What's "usemem"? Is it a tool and how to get it?
> >>>http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/attachments/gtarazbJaHPaAT.gtar
> >>Thanks for your response.  But how to use it, I even can't compile
> >>the files.
> >>
> >># ./case-lru-file-mmap-read
> >>./case-lru-file-mmap-read: line 3: hw_vars: No such file or directory
> >>./case-lru-file-mmap-read: line 7: 10 * mem / nr_cpu: division by 0
> >>(error token is "nr_cpu")
> >>
> >># gcc usemem.c -o usemem
> >-lpthread
> >
> >>/tmp/ccFkIDWk.o: In function `do_task':
> >>usemem.c:(.text+0x9f2): undefined reference to `pthread_create'
> >>usemem.c:(.text+0xa44): undefined reference to `pthread_join'
> >>collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >>
> >>>>It's hard for me to
> >>>>find nr_to_scan > 0 in every callset, how can nr_to_scan > 0 in your
> >>>>scenario?
> >>>shrink_slab() calls the callback with nr_to_scan > 0 if system is under
> >>>pressure -- look for do_shrinker_shrink().
> >>Why Andrew's example(dd if=/fast-disk/large-file) doesn't call this
> >>path? I think it also can add memory pressure, where I miss?
> >dd if=large-file only fills pagecache -- easy reclaimable memory.
> >Pagecache will be dropped first, before shrinking slabs.
> 
> How could I confirm page reclaim working hard and slabs are
> reclaimed at this time?

The only what I see is slabs_scanned in vmstat.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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/