linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mm: mlock: remove lru_add_drain

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]

Date:   Sat, 21 Oct 2017 08:51:04 +1100
From:   Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1@...wei.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: mlock: remove lru_add_drain_all()

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 9:25 AM, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com> wrote:
> lru_add_drain_all() is not required by mlock() and it will drain
> everything that has been cached at the time mlock is called. And
> that is not really related to the memory which will be faulted in
> (and cached) and mlocked by the syscall itself.
>
> Without lru_add_drain_all() the mlocked pages can remain on pagevecs
> and be moved to evictable LRUs. However they will eventually be moved
> back to unevictable LRU by reclaim. So, we can safely remove
> lru_add_drain_all() from mlock syscall. Also there is no need for
> local lru_add_drain() as it will be called deep inside __mm_populate()
> (in follow_page_pte()).
>
> On larger machines the overhead of lru_add_drain_all() in mlock() can
> be significant when mlocking data already in memory. We have observed
> high latency in mlock() due to lru_add_drain_all() when the users
> were mlocking in memory tmpfs files.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
> ---

I'm afraid I still don't fully understand the impact in terms of numbers and
statistics as seen from inside a cgroup. My understanding is that we'll slowly
see the unreclaimable stats go up as we drain the pvec's across CPU's
I understand the optimization and I can see why lru_add_drain_all() is
expensive.

Acked-by: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>

Balbir Singh.