linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net] RDMA/umem: add a schedule point in ib_umem

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANn89i+SwhK8XKDqKKvL1svnBWKxv28iKzD2nEf2g0pOO0+0qQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 31 Jul 2020 10:21:08 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] RDMA/umem: add a schedule point in ib_umem_get()

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 10:17 AM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 06:57:55PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Mapping as little as 64GB can take more than 10 seconds,
> > triggering issues on kernels with CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y.
> >
> > ib_umem_get() already splits the work in 2MB units on x86_64,
> > adding a cond_resched() in the long-lasting loop is enough
> > to solve the issue.
> >
> > Note that sg_alloc_table() can still use more than 100 ms,
> > which is also problematic. This might be addressed later
> > in ib_umem_add_sg_table(), adding new blocks in sgl
> > on demand.
>
> I have seen some patches in progress to do exactly this, the
> motivation is to reduce the memory consumption if a lot of pages are
> combined.

Nice ;)

>
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> > Cc: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
> > Cc: linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
> > ---
> >  drivers/infiniband/core/umem.c | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> Why [PATCH net] ?

Sorry, I used a script that I normally use for net submissions, forgot
to remove this tag ;)

>
> Anyhow, applied to rdma for-next

Thanks !

>
> Thanks,
> Jason