linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] improve vmalloc allocation

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:   Fri, 19 Oct 2018 22:44:39 +0000
From:   Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To:     "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@...il.com>
CC:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        "Thomas Garnier" <thgarnie@...gle.com>,
        Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...ymobile.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] improve vmalloc allocation

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 07:35:36PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> Objective
> ---------
> Initiative of improving vmalloc allocator comes from getting many issues
> related to allocation time, i.e. sometimes it is terribly slow. As a result
> many workloads which are sensitive for long (more than 1 millisecond) preemption
> off scenario are affected by that slowness(test cases like UI or audio, etc.).
> 
> The problem is that, currently an allocation of the new VA area is done over
> busy list iteration until a suitable hole is found between two busy areas.
> Therefore each new allocation causes the list being grown. Due to long list
> and different permissive parameters an allocation can take a long time on
> embedded devices(milliseconds).
...
> 3) This one is related to PCPU allocator(see pcpu_alloc_test()). In that
> stress test case i see that SUnreclaim(/proc/meminfo) parameter gets increased,
> i.e. there is a memory leek somewhere in percpu allocator. It sounds like
> a memory that is allocated by pcpu_get_vm_areas() sometimes is not freed.
> Resulting in memory leaking or "Kernel panic":
> 

Can you, please, try the following patch:
6685b357363b ("percpu: stop leaking bitmap metadata blocks") ?

BTW, with growing number of vmalloc users (per-cpu allocator and bpf stuff are
big drivers), I find the patchset very interesting.

Thanks!