| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20150719190810.809975560@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 12:08:00 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.1 41/65] mm, thp: respect MPOL_PREFERRED policy with non-local node
4.1-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
commit 0867a57c4f80a566dda1bac975b42fcd857cb489 upstream.
Since commit 077fcf116c8c ("mm/thp: allocate transparent hugepages on
local node"), we handle THP allocations on page fault in a special way -
for non-interleave memory policies, the allocation is only attempted on
the node local to the current CPU, if the policy's nodemask allows the
node.
This is motivated by the assumption that THP benefits cannot offset the
cost of remote accesses, so it's better to fallback to base pages on the
local node (which might still be available, while huge pages are not due
to fragmentation) than to allocate huge pages on a remote node.
The nodemask check prevents us from violating e.g. MPOL_BIND policies
where the local node is not among the allowed nodes. However, the
current implementation can still give surprising results for the
MPOL_PREFERRED policy when the preferred node is different than the
current CPU's local node.
In such case we should honor the preferred node and not use the local
node, which is what this patch does. If hugepage allocation on the
preferred node fails, we fall back to base pages and don't try other
nodes, with the same motivation as is done for the local node hugepage
allocations. The patch also moves the MPOL_INTERLEAVE check around to
simplify the hugepage specific test.
The difference can be demonstrated using in-tree transhuge-stress test
on the following 2-node machine where half memory on one node was
occupied to show the difference.
> numactl --hardware
available: 2 nodes (0-1)
node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
node 0 size: 7878 MB
node 0 free: 3623 MB
node 1 cpus: 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
node 1 size: 8045 MB
node 1 free: 7818 MB
node distances:
node 0 1
0: 10 21
1: 21 10
Before the patch:
> numactl -p0 -C0 ./transhuge-stress
transhuge-stress: 2.197 s/loop, 0.276 ms/page, 7249.168 MiB/s 7962 succeed, 0 failed, 1786 different pages
> numactl -p0 -C12 ./transhuge-stress
transhuge-stress: 2.962 s/loop, 0.372 ms/page, 5376.172 MiB/s 7962 succeed, 0 failed, 3873 different pages
Number of successful THP allocations corresponds to free memory on node 0 in
the first case and node 1 in the second case, i.e. -p parameter is ignored and
cpu binding "wins".
After the patch:
> numactl -p0 -C0 ./transhuge-stress
transhuge-stress: 2.183 s/loop, 0.274 ms/page, 7295.516 MiB/s 7962 succeed, 0 failed, 1760 different pages
> numactl -p0 -C12 ./transhuge-stress
transhuge-stress: 2.878 s/loop, 0.361 ms/page, 5533.638 MiB/s 7962 succeed, 0 failed, 1750 different pages
> numactl -p1 -C0 ./transhuge-stress
transhuge-stress: 4.628 s/loop, 0.581 ms/page, 3440.893 MiB/s 7962 succeed, 0 failed, 3918 different pages
The -p parameter is respected regardless of cpu binding.
> numactl -C0 ./transhuge-stress
transhuge-stress: 2.202 s/loop, 0.277 ms/page, 7230.003 MiB/s 7962 succeed, 0 failed, 1750 different pages
> numactl -C12 ./transhuge-stress
transhuge-stress: 3.020 s/loop, 0.379 ms/page, 5273.324 MiB/s 7962 succeed, 0 failed, 3916 different pages
Without -p parameter, hugepage restriction to CPU-local node works as before.
Fixes: 077fcf116c8c ("mm/thp: allocate transparent hugepages on local node")
Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
mm/mempolicy.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -1972,35 +1972,41 @@ retry_cpuset:
pol = get_vma_policy(vma, addr);
cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
- if (unlikely(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE) && hugepage &&
- pol->mode != MPOL_INTERLEAVE)) {
+ if (pol->mode == MPOL_INTERLEAVE) {
+ unsigned nid;
+
+ nid = interleave_nid(pol, vma, addr, PAGE_SHIFT + order);
+ mpol_cond_put(pol);
+ page = alloc_page_interleave(gfp, order, nid);
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ if (unlikely(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE) && hugepage)) {
+ int hpage_node = node;
+
/*
* For hugepage allocation and non-interleave policy which
- * allows the current node, we only try to allocate from the
- * current node and don't fall back to other nodes, as the
- * cost of remote accesses would likely offset THP benefits.
+ * allows the current node (or other explicitly preferred
+ * node) we only try to allocate from the current/preferred
+ * node and don't fall back to other nodes, as the cost of
+ * remote accesses would likely offset THP benefits.
*
* If the policy is interleave, or does not allow the current
* node in its nodemask, we allocate the standard way.
*/
+ if (pol->mode == MPOL_PREFERRED &&
+ !(pol->flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL))
+ hpage_node = pol->v.preferred_node;
+
nmask = policy_nodemask(gfp, pol);
- if (!nmask || node_isset(node, *nmask)) {
+ if (!nmask || node_isset(hpage_node, *nmask)) {
mpol_cond_put(pol);
- page = alloc_pages_exact_node(node,
+ page = alloc_pages_exact_node(hpage_node,
gfp | __GFP_THISNODE, order);
goto out;
}
}
- if (pol->mode == MPOL_INTERLEAVE) {
- unsigned nid;
-
- nid = interleave_nid(pol, vma, addr, PAGE_SHIFT + order);
- mpol_cond_put(pol);
- page = alloc_page_interleave(gfp, order, nid);
- goto out;
- }
-
nmask = policy_nodemask(gfp, pol);
zl = policy_zonelist(gfp, pol, node);
mpol_cond_put(pol);
--
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