| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20200825111524.v2bnoya35spde3zt@wittgenstein>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 13:15:24 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: mhocko@...e.com, mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, esyr@...hat.com, christian@...lner.me,
areber@...hat.com, shakeelb@...gle.com, cyphar@...har.com,
oleg@...hat.com, adobriyan@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, gladkov.alexey@...il.com, walken@...gle.com,
daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com, avagin@...il.com,
bernd.edlinger@...mail.de, john.johansen@...onical.com,
laoar.shao@...il.com, timmurray@...gle.com, minchan@...nel.org,
kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm, oom_adj: don't loop through tasks in
__set_oom_adj when not necessary
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 08:30:36AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> Currently __set_oom_adj loops through all processes in the system to
> keep oom_score_adj and oom_score_adj_min in sync between processes
> sharing their mm. This is done for any task with more that one mm_users,
> which includes processes with multiple threads (sharing mm and signals).
> However for such processes the loop is unnecessary because their signal
> structure is shared as well.
> Android updates oom_score_adj whenever a tasks changes its role
> (background/foreground/...) or binds to/unbinds from a service, making
> it more/less important. Such operation can happen frequently.
> We noticed that updates to oom_score_adj became more expensive and after
> further investigation found out that the patch mentioned in "Fixes"
> introduced a regression. Using Pixel 4 with a typical Android workload,
> write time to oom_score_adj increased from ~3.57us to ~362us. Moreover
> this regression linearly depends on the number of multi-threaded
> processes running on the system.
> Mark the mm with a new MMF_PROC_SHARED flag bit when task is created with
> (CLONE_VM && !CLONE_THREAD && !CLONE_VFORK). Change __set_oom_adj to use
> MMF_PROC_SHARED instead of mm_users to decide whether oom_score_adj
> update should be synchronized between multiple processes. To prevent
> races between clone() and __set_oom_adj(), when oom_score_adj of the
> process being cloned might be modified from userspace, we use
> oom_adj_mutex. Its scope is changed to global and it is renamed into
> oom_adj_lock for naming consistency with oom_lock. The combination of
> (CLONE_VM && !CLONE_THREAD) is rarely used except for the case of vfork().
> To prevent performance regressions of vfork(), we skip taking oom_adj_lock
> and setting MMF_PROC_SHARED when CLONE_VFORK is specified. Clearing the
> MMF_PROC_SHARED flag (when the last process sharing the mm exits) is left
> out of this patch to keep it simple and because it is believed that this
> threading model is rare. Should there ever be a need for optimizing that
> case as well, it can be done by hooking into the exit path, likely
> following the mm_update_next_owner pattern.
> With the combination of (CLONE_VM && !CLONE_THREAD && !CLONE_VFORK) being
> quite rare, the regression is gone after the change is applied.
>
> Fixes: 44a70adec910 ("mm, oom_adj: make sure processes sharing mm have same view of oom_score_adj")
> Reported-by: Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>
> Debugged-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
> Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> ---
>
> v2:
> - Implemented proposal from Michal Hocko in:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20200820124109.GI5033@dhcp22.suse.cz/
> - Updated description to reflect the change
>
> v1:
> - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200820002053.1424000-1-surenb@google.com/
>
> fs/proc/base.c | 7 +++----
> include/linux/oom.h | 1 +
> include/linux/sched/coredump.h | 1 +
> kernel/fork.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> mm/oom_kill.c | 2 ++
> 5 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
> index 617db4e0faa0..cff1a58a236c 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/base.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
> @@ -1055,7 +1055,6 @@ static ssize_t oom_adj_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf, size_t count,
>
> static int __set_oom_adj(struct file *file, int oom_adj, bool legacy)
> {
> - static DEFINE_MUTEX(oom_adj_mutex);
> struct mm_struct *mm = NULL;
> struct task_struct *task;
> int err = 0;
> @@ -1064,7 +1063,7 @@ static int __set_oom_adj(struct file *file, int oom_adj, bool legacy)
> if (!task)
> return -ESRCH;
>
> - mutex_lock(&oom_adj_mutex);
> + mutex_lock(&oom_adj_lock);
> if (legacy) {
> if (oom_adj < task->signal->oom_score_adj &&
> !capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE)) {
> @@ -1095,7 +1094,7 @@ static int __set_oom_adj(struct file *file, int oom_adj, bool legacy)
> struct task_struct *p = find_lock_task_mm(task);
>
> if (p) {
> - if (atomic_read(&p->mm->mm_users) > 1) {
> + if (test_bit(MMF_PROC_SHARED, &p->mm->flags)) {
> mm = p->mm;
> mmgrab(mm);
> }
> @@ -1132,7 +1131,7 @@ static int __set_oom_adj(struct file *file, int oom_adj, bool legacy)
> mmdrop(mm);
> }
> err_unlock:
> - mutex_unlock(&oom_adj_mutex);
> + mutex_unlock(&oom_adj_lock);
> put_task_struct(task);
> return err;
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
> index f022f581ac29..861f22bd4706 100644
> --- a/include/linux/oom.h
> +++ b/include/linux/oom.h
> @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ struct oom_control {
> };
>
> extern struct mutex oom_lock;
> +extern struct mutex oom_adj_lock;
>
> static inline void set_current_oom_origin(void)
> {
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
> index ecdc6542070f..070629b722df 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched/coredump.h
> @@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ static inline int get_dumpable(struct mm_struct *mm)
> #define MMF_DISABLE_THP 24 /* disable THP for all VMAs */
> #define MMF_OOM_VICTIM 25 /* mm is the oom victim */
> #define MMF_OOM_REAP_QUEUED 26 /* mm was queued for oom_reaper */
> +#define MMF_PROC_SHARED 27 /* mm is shared while sighand is not */
> #define MMF_DISABLE_THP_MASK (1 << MMF_DISABLE_THP)
>
> #define MMF_INIT_MASK (MMF_DUMPABLE_MASK | MMF_DUMP_FILTER_MASK |\
> diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
> index 4d32190861bd..6fce8ffa9b8b 100644
> --- a/kernel/fork.c
> +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> @@ -1809,6 +1809,25 @@ static __always_inline void delayed_free_task(struct task_struct *tsk)
> free_task(tsk);
> }
>
> +static void copy_oom_score_adj(u64 clone_flags, struct task_struct *tsk)
> +{
> + /* Skip if kernel thread */
> + if (!tsk->mm)
> + return;
Hm, wouldn't
if (tsk->flags & PF_KTHREAD)
return;
be clearer and more future proof?
Christian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists