linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] hugetlbfs: Add hugetlb

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]

Message-ID: <CAHS8izN9BFASse_pjLEhQzWwofjRv+JQ5Z=ZiR6Wywn2USLELA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Aug 2019 13:57:41 -0700
From:   Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
To:     Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Cc:     Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
        shuah <shuah@...nel.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        khalid.aziz@...cle.com, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] hugetlbfs: Add hugetlb_cgroup reservation limits

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 1:39 PM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/9/19 11:05 AM, Mina Almasry wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 4:27 AM Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com> wrote:
> >>> Alternatives considered:
> >>> [...]
> >> (I did not try that but) have you considered:
> >> 3) MAP_POPULATE while you're making the reservation,
> >
> > I have tried this, and the behaviour is not great. Basically if
> > userspace mmaps more memory than its cgroup limit allows with
> > MAP_POPULATE, the kernel will reserve the total amount requested by
> > the userspace, it will fault in up to the cgroup limit, and then it
> > will SIGBUS the task when it tries to access the rest of its
> > 'reserved' memory.
> >
> > So for example:
> > - if /proc/sys/vm/nr_hugepages == 10, and
> > - your cgroup limit is 5 pages, and
> > - you mmap(MAP_POPULATE) 7 pages.
> >
> > Then the kernel will reserve 7 pages, and will fault in 5 of those 7
> > pages, and will SIGBUS you when you try to access the remaining 2
> > pages. So the problem persists. Folks would still like to know they
> > are crossing the limits on mmap time.
>
> If you got the failure at mmap time in the MAP_POPULATE case would this
> be useful?
>
> Just thinking that would be a relatively simple change.

Not quite, unfortunately. A subset of the folks that want to use
hugetlb memory, don't want to use MAP_POPULATE (IIRC, something about
mmaping a huge amount of hugetlb memory at their jobs' startup, and
doing that with MAP_POPULATE adds so much to their startup time that
it is prohibitively expensive - but that's just what I vaguely recall
offhand. I can get you the details if you're interested).

> --
> Mike Kravetz