linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 3/6] mm: Introduce Reported pages

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: <49395e48-175f-8483-77f5-5fc3aca8b7cb@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Sep 2019 17:47:24 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Cc:     virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@...il.com>,
        Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@...hat.com>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
        Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@...hat.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, lcapitulino@...hat.com,
        "Wang, Wei W" <wei.w.wang@...el.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 3/6] mm: Introduce Reported pages

On 23.09.19 17:45, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 23.09.19 17:37, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 08:28:00AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 8:00 AM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 07:50:15AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>>>>>> +static inline void
>>>>>>> +page_reporting_reset_boundary(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order, int mt)
>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>> +     int index;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +     if (order < PAGE_REPORTING_MIN_ORDER)
>>>>>>> +             return;
>>>>>>> +     if (!test_bit(ZONE_PAGE_REPORTING_ACTIVE, &zone->flags))
>>>>>>> +             return;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +     index = get_reporting_index(order, mt);
>>>>>>> +     reported_boundary[index] = &zone->free_area[order].free_list[mt];
>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So this seems to be costly.
>>>>>> I'm guessing it's the access to flags:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         /* zone flags, see below */
>>>>>>         unsigned long           flags;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         /* Primarily protects free_area */
>>>>>>         spinlock_t              lock;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> which is in the same cache line as the lock.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure what you mean by this being costly?
>>>>
>>>> I've just been wondering why does will it scale report a 1.5% regression
>>>> with this patch.
>>>
>>> Are you talking about data you have collected from a test you have
>>> run, or the data I have run?
>>
>> About the kernel test robot auto report that was sent recently.
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/21/112
> 
> And if I'm correct, that regression is observable in case reporting is
> not enabled. (so with this patch applied only, e.g., on a bare-metal system)
> 

To be even more precise: # CONFIG_PAGE_REPORTING is not set

-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb