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  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]
Date:   Tue, 24 Jan 2017 12:08:35 +0100
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm, page_alloc: Drain per-cpu pages from workqueue
 context

On 01/17/2017 10:29 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> The per-cpu page allocator can be drained immediately via drain_all_pages()
> which sends IPIs to every CPU. In the next patch, the per-cpu allocator
> will only be used for interrupt-safe allocations which prevents draining
> it from IPI context. This patch uses workqueues to drain the per-cpu
> lists instead.
> 
> This is slower but no slowdown during intensive reclaim was measured and
> the paths that use drain_all_pages() are not that sensitive to performance.
> This is particularly true as the path would only be triggered when reclaim
> is failing. It also makes a some sense to avoid storming a machine with IPIs
> when it's under memory pressure. Arguably, it should be further adjusted
> so that only one caller at a time is draining pages but it's beyond the
> scope of the current patch.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
> ---
>  mm/page_alloc.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index d15527a20dce..9c3a0fcf8c13 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -2341,19 +2341,21 @@ void drain_local_pages(struct zone *zone)
>  		drain_pages(cpu);
>  }
>  
> +static void drain_local_pages_wq(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> +	drain_local_pages(NULL);
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * Spill all the per-cpu pages from all CPUs back into the buddy allocator.
>   *
>   * When zone parameter is non-NULL, spill just the single zone's pages.
>   *
> - * Note that this code is protected against sending an IPI to an offline
> - * CPU but does not guarantee sending an IPI to newly hotplugged CPUs:
> - * on_each_cpu_mask() blocks hotplug and won't talk to offlined CPUs but
> - * nothing keeps CPUs from showing up after we populated the cpumask and
> - * before the call to on_each_cpu_mask().
> + * Note that this can be extremely slow as the draining happens in a workqueue.
>   */
>  void drain_all_pages(struct zone *zone)
>  {
> +	struct work_struct __percpu *works;
>  	int cpu;
>  
>  	/*
> @@ -2362,6 +2364,16 @@ void drain_all_pages(struct zone *zone)
>  	 */
>  	static cpumask_t cpus_with_pcps;
>  
> +	/* Workqueues cannot recurse */
> +	if (current->flags & PF_WQ_WORKER)
> +		return;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * As this can be called from reclaim context, do not reenter reclaim.
> +	 * An allocation failure can be handled, it's simply slower
> +	 */
> +	works = alloc_percpu_gfp(struct work_struct, GFP_ATOMIC);

BTW I wonder, even with GFP_ATOMIC, is this a good idea to do for a
temporary allocation like this one? pcpu_alloc() seems rather involved
to me and I've glanced at the other usages and they seem much more
long-lived. Maybe it would be really better to have single static
"works" and serialize the callers as you suggest in the changelog?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists