linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/28] The new cgroup slab memory controller

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: <CA+CK2bDAjykqdMrrOEp=NJ28Z4CALXWkHixNMc5tmRYVk75Eig@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Sep 2020 10:20:24 -0400
From:   Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <dhildenb@...hat.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
        Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
        Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/28] The new cgroup slab memory controller

> > This is how we are using it at Microsoft: there is  a very large
> > number of small memory machines (8G each) with low downtime
> > requirements (reboot must be under a second). There is also a large
> > state ~2G of memory that we need to transfer during reboot, otherwise
> > it is very expensive to recreate the state. We have 2G of system
> > memory memory reserved as a pmem in the device tree, and use it to
> > pass information across reboots. Once the information is not needed we
> > hot-add that memory and use it during runtime, before shutdown we
> > hot-remove the 2G, save the program state on it, and do the reboot.
>
> I still do not get it. So what does guarantee that the memory is
> offlineable in the first place?

It is in a movable zone, and we have more than 2G of free memory for
successful migrations.

> Also what is the difference between
> offlining and simply shutting the system down so that the memory is not
> used in the first place. In other words what kind of difference
> hotremove makes?

For performance reasons during system updates/reboots we do not erase
memory content. The memory content is erased only on power cycle,
which we do not do in production.

Once we hot-remove the memory, we convert it back into DAXFS PMEM
device, format it into EXT4, mount it as DAX file system, and allow
programs to serialize their states to it so they can read it back
after the reboot.

During startup we mount pmem, programs read the state back, and after
that we hotplug the PMEM DAX as a movable zone. This way during normal
runtime we have 8G available to programs.

Pasha