| 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: <ce7c8bac-49ca-d8c0-05fd-95465dc2f65b@suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 14:52:52 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/27] mm, vmscan: Begin reclaiming pages on a per-node
basis
On 06/09/2016 08:04 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> This patch makes reclaim decisions on a per-node basis. A reclaimer knows
> what zone is required by the allocation request and skips pages from
> higher zones. In many cases this will be ok because it's a GFP_HIGHMEM
> request of some description. On 64-bit, ZONE_DMA32 requests will cause
> some problems but 32-bit devices on 64-bit platforms are increasingly
> rare. Historically it would have been a major problem on 32-bit with big
> Highmem:Lowmem ratios but such configurations are also now rare and even
> where they exist, they are not encouraged. If it really becomes a problem,
> it'll manifest as very low reclaim efficiencies.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index f87a5a0f8793..ab1b28e7e20a 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -84,6 +84,9 @@ struct scan_control {
> /* Scan (total_size >> priority) pages at once */
> int priority;
>
> + /* The highest zone to isolate pages for reclaim from */
> + enum zone_type reclaim_idx;
> +
> unsigned int may_writepage:1;
>
> /* Can mapped pages be reclaimed? */
> @@ -1369,6 +1372,7 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> struct list_head *src = &lruvec->lists[lru];
> unsigned long nr_taken = 0;
> unsigned long scan;
> + LIST_HEAD(pages_skipped);
>
> for (scan = 0; scan < nr_to_scan && nr_taken < nr_to_scan &&
> !list_empty(src); scan++) {
> @@ -1379,6 +1383,11 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
>
> VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageLRU(page), page);
>
> + if (page_zonenum(page) > sc->reclaim_idx) {
> + list_move(&page->lru, &pages_skipped);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> switch (__isolate_lru_page(page, mode)) {
> case 0:
> nr_taken += hpage_nr_pages(page);
> @@ -1395,6 +1404,15 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> }
> }
>
> + /*
> + * Splice any skipped pages to the start of the LRU list. Note that
> + * this disrupts the LRU order when reclaiming for lower zones but
> + * we cannot splice to the tail. If we did then the SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX
> + * scanning would soon rescan the same pages to skip and put the
> + * system at risk of premature OOM.
> + */
> + if (!list_empty(&pages_skipped))
> + list_splice(&pages_skipped, src);
Hmm, that's unfortunate. But probably better than reclaiming the pages
in the name of LRU order, even though it wouldn't help the allocation at
hand.
[...]
> @@ -2516,14 +2535,14 @@ static inline bool compaction_ready(struct zone *zone, int order, int classzone_
> * If a zone is deemed to be full of pinned pages then just give it a light
> * scan then give up on it.
> */
> -static void shrink_zones(struct zonelist *zonelist, struct scan_control *sc)
> +static void shrink_zones(struct zonelist *zonelist, struct scan_control *sc,
> + enum zone_type classzone_idx)
> {
> struct zoneref *z;
> struct zone *zone;
> unsigned long nr_soft_reclaimed;
> unsigned long nr_soft_scanned;
> gfp_t orig_mask;
> - enum zone_type requested_highidx = gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask);
>
> /*
> * If the number of buffer_heads in the machine exceeds the maximum
> @@ -2536,15 +2555,15 @@ static void shrink_zones(struct zonelist *zonelist, struct scan_control *sc)
>
> for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask), sc->nodemask) {
> - enum zone_type classzone_idx;
> -
> if (!populated_zone(zone))
> continue;
>
> - classzone_idx = requested_highidx;
> while (!populated_zone(zone->zone_pgdat->node_zones +
> - classzone_idx))
> + classzone_idx)) {
> + sc->reclaim_idx--;
> classzone_idx--;
> + continue;
Isn't this wrong to do this across whole zonelist which will contain
multiple nodes? Example: a small node 0 without Normal zone will get us
sc->reclaim_idx == classzone_idx == dma32. Node 1 won't have dma/dma32
zones so we won't see classzone_idx populated, and the while loop will
lead to underflow?
And sc->reclaim_idx seems to be unitialized when called via
try_to_free_pages() -> do_try_to_free_pages() -> shrink_zones() ?
Which means it's zero and we underflow immediately?
> @@ -3207,15 +3228,14 @@ static int balance_pgdat(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int classzone_idx)
> sc.may_writepage = 1;
>
> /*
> - * Now scan the zone in the dma->highmem direction, stopping
> - * at the last zone which needs scanning.
> - *
> - * We do this because the page allocator works in the opposite
> - * direction. This prevents the page allocator from allocating
> - * pages behind kswapd's direction of progress, which would
> - * cause too much scanning of the lower zones.
> + * Continue scanning in the highmem->dma direction stopping at
> + * the last zone which needs scanning. This may reclaim lowmem
> + * pages that are not necessary for zone balancing but it
> + * preserves LRU ordering. It is assumed that the bulk of
> + * allocation requests can use arbitrary zones with the
> + * possible exception of big highmem:lowmem configurations.
> */
> - for (i = 0; i <= end_zone; i++) {
> + for (i = end_zone; i >= end_zone; i--) {
i >= 0 ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists