| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 16:23:56 -0800
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>, <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>,
<hughd@...gle.com>, <aarcange@...hat.com>,
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] mm: ksm: do not block on page lock when searching
stable tree
On 1/23/19 3:52 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
> ksmd need search stable tree to look for the suitable KSM page, but the
> KSM page might be locked for a while due to i.e. KSM page rmap walk.
> Basically it is not a big deal since commit 2c653d0ee2ae
> ("ksm: introduce ksm_max_page_sharing per page deduplication limit"),
> since max_page_sharing limits the number of shared KSM pages.
>
> But it still sounds not worth waiting for the lock, the page can be skip,
> then try to merge it in the next scan to avoid potential stall if its
> content is still intact.
>
> Introduce async mode to get_ksm_page() to not block on page lock, like
> what try_to_merge_one_page() does.
>
> Return -EBUSY if trylock fails, since NULL means not find suitable KSM
> page, which is a valid case.
>
> With the default max_page_sharing setting (256), there is almost no
> observed change comparing lock vs trylock.
>
> However, with ksm02 of LTP, the reduced ksmd full scan time can be
> observed, which has set max_page_sharing to 786432. With lock version,
> ksmd may tak 10s - 11s to run two full scans, with trylock version ksmd
> may take 8s - 11s to run two full scans. And, the number of
> pages_sharing and pages_to_scan keep same. Basically, this change has
> no harm.
>
> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> Hi folks,
>
> This patch was with "mm: vmscan: skip KSM page in direct reclaim if priority
> is low" in the initial submission. Then Hugh and Andrea pointed out commit
> 2c653d0ee2ae ("ksm: introduce ksm_max_page_sharing per page deduplication
> limit") is good enough for limiting the number of shared KSM page to prevent
> from softlock when walking ksm page rmap. This commit does solve the problem.
> So, the series was dropped by Andrew from -mm tree.
>
> However, I thought the second patch (this one) still sounds useful. So, I did
> some test and resubmit it. The first version was reviewed by Krill Tkhai, so
> I keep his Reviewed-by tag since there is no change to the patch except the
> commit log.
>
> So, would you please reconsider this patch?
>
> v2: Updated the commit log to reflect some test result and latest discussion
>
> mm/ksm.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/ksm.c b/mm/ksm.c
> index 6c48ad1..f66405c 100644
> --- a/mm/ksm.c
> +++ b/mm/ksm.c
> @@ -668,7 +668,7 @@ static void remove_node_from_stable_tree(struct stable_node *stable_node)
> }
>
> /*
> - * get_ksm_page: checks if the page indicated by the stable node
> + * __get_ksm_page: checks if the page indicated by the stable node
> * is still its ksm page, despite having held no reference to it.
> * In which case we can trust the content of the page, and it
> * returns the gotten page; but if the page has now been zapped,
> @@ -686,7 +686,8 @@ static void remove_node_from_stable_tree(struct stable_node *stable_node)
> * a page to put something that might look like our key in page->mapping.
> * is on its way to being freed; but it is an anomaly to bear in mind.
> */
> -static struct page *get_ksm_page(struct stable_node *stable_node, bool lock_it)
> +static struct page *__get_ksm_page(struct stable_node *stable_node,
> + bool lock_it, bool async)
> {
> struct page *page;
> void *expected_mapping;
> @@ -729,7 +730,14 @@ static struct page *get_ksm_page(struct stable_node *stable_node, bool lock_it)
> }
>
> if (lock_it) {
> - lock_page(page);
> + if (async) {
> + if (!trylock_page(page)) {
> + put_page(page);
> + return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
> + }
> + } else
> + lock_page(page);
> +
> if (READ_ONCE(page->mapping) != expected_mapping) {
> unlock_page(page);
> put_page(page);
> @@ -752,6 +760,11 @@ static struct page *get_ksm_page(struct stable_node *stable_node, bool lock_it)
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +static struct page *get_ksm_page(struct stable_node *stable_node, bool lock_it)
> +{
> + return __get_ksm_page(stable_node, lock_it, false);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Removing rmap_item from stable or unstable tree.
> * This function will clean the information from the stable/unstable tree.
> @@ -1673,7 +1686,11 @@ static struct page *stable_tree_search(struct page *page)
> * It would be more elegant to return stable_node
> * than kpage, but that involves more changes.
> */
> - tree_page = get_ksm_page(stable_node_dup, true);
> + tree_page = __get_ksm_page(stable_node_dup, true, true);
Hi Yang,
The bools are stacking up: now you've got two, and the above invocation is no longer
understandable on its own. At this point, we normally shift to flags and/or an
enum.
Also, I see little value in adding a stub function here, so how about something more
like the following approximation (untested, and changes to callers are not shown):
diff --git a/mm/ksm.c b/mm/ksm.c
index 6c48ad13b4c9..8390b7905b44 100644
--- a/mm/ksm.c
+++ b/mm/ksm.c
@@ -667,6 +667,12 @@ static void remove_node_from_stable_tree(struct stable_node *stable_node)
free_stable_node(stable_node);
}
+typedef enum {
+ GET_KSM_PAGE_NORMAL,
+ GET_KSM_PAGE_LOCK_PAGE,
+ GET_KSM_PAGE_TRYLOCK_PAGE
+} get_ksm_page_t;
+
/*
* get_ksm_page: checks if the page indicated by the stable node
* is still its ksm page, despite having held no reference to it.
@@ -686,7 +692,8 @@ static void remove_node_from_stable_tree(struct stable_node *stable_node)
* a page to put something that might look like our key in page->mapping.
* is on its way to being freed; but it is an anomaly to bear in mind.
*/
-static struct page *get_ksm_page(struct stable_node *stable_node, bool lock_it)
+static struct page *get_ksm_page(struct stable_node *stable_node,
+ get_ksm_page_t flags)
{
struct page *page;
void *expected_mapping;
@@ -728,8 +735,17 @@ static struct page *get_ksm_page(struct stable_node *stable_node, bool lock_it)
goto stale;
}
- if (lock_it) {
+ if (flags == GET_KSM_PAGE_TRYLOCK_PAGE) {
+ if (!trylock_page(page)) {
+ put_page(page);
+ return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
+ }
+ } else if (flags == GET_KSM_PAGE_LOCK_PAGE) {
lock_page(page);
+ }
+
+ if (flags == GET_KSM_PAGE_LOCK_PAGE ||
+ flags == GET_KSM_PAGE_TRYLOCK_PAGE) {
if (READ_ONCE(page->mapping) != expected_mapping) {
unlock_page(page);
put_page(page);
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
> +
> + if (PTR_ERR(tree_page) == -EBUSY)
> + return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
> +
> if (unlikely(!tree_page))
> /*
> * The tree may have been rebalanced,
> @@ -2060,6 +2077,10 @@ static void cmp_and_merge_page(struct page *page, struct rmap_item *rmap_item)
>
> /* We first start with searching the page inside the stable tree */
> kpage = stable_tree_search(page);
> +
> + if (PTR_ERR(kpage) == -EBUSY)
> + return;
> +
> if (kpage == page && rmap_item->head == stable_node) {
> put_page(kpage);
> return;
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists