linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/hugetlb: refactor subpage recording

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: <3d34111f-8365-ab95-af11-aaf4825204be@oracle.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Jan 2021 10:08:25 -0800
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To:     Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/hugetlb: refactor subpage recording

On 1/25/21 12:57 PM, Joao Martins wrote:
> For a given hugepage backing a VA, there's a rather ineficient
> loop which is solely responsible for storing subpages in the passed
> pages/vmas array. For each subpage we check whether it's within
> range or size of @pages and keep incrementing @pfn_offset and a couple
> other variables per subpage iteration.
> 
> Simplify this logic and minimize ops per iteration to just
> store the output page/vma. Instead of incrementing number of @refs
> iteratively, we do it through a precalculation of @refs and having
> only a tight loop for storing pinned subpages/vmas.
> 
> pinning consequently improves considerably, bringing us close to
> {pin,get}_user_pages_fast:
> 
>  - 16G with 1G huge page size
>  gup_test -f /mnt/huge/file -m 16384 -r 10 -L -S -n 512 -w
> 
>  PIN_LONGTERM_BENCHMARK: ~11k us -> ~4400 us
>  PIN_FAST_BENCHMARK: ~3700 us
> 
> Signed-off-by: Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>
> ---
>  mm/hugetlb.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> index 016addc8e413..1f7a95bc7c87 100644
> --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> @@ -4789,6 +4789,20 @@ int hugetlb_mcopy_atomic_pte(struct mm_struct *dst_mm,
>  	goto out;
>  }
>  
> +static void record_subpages_vmas(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> +				 int refs, struct page **pages,
> +				 struct vm_area_struct **vmas)
> +{
> +	int nr;
> +
> +	for (nr = 0; nr < refs; nr++) {
> +		if (likely(pages))
> +			pages[nr] = page++;
> +		if (vmas)
> +			vmas[nr] = vma;
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  long follow_hugetlb_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  			 struct page **pages, struct vm_area_struct **vmas,
>  			 unsigned long *position, unsigned long *nr_pages,
> @@ -4918,28 +4932,16 @@ long follow_hugetlb_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  			continue;
>  		}
>  
> -		refs = 0;
> +		refs = min3(pages_per_huge_page(h) - pfn_offset,
> +			    (vma->vm_end - vaddr) >> PAGE_SHIFT, remainder);
>  
> -same_page:
> -		if (pages)
> -			pages[i] = mem_map_offset(page, pfn_offset);
> +		if (pages || vmas)
> +			record_subpages_vmas(mem_map_offset(page, pfn_offset),

The assumption made here is that mem_map is contiguous for the range of
pages in the hugetlb page.  I do not believe you can make this assumption
for (gigantic) hugetlb pages which are > MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES.  For example,

/*
 * Gigantic pages are so large that we do not guarantee that page++ pointer
 * arithmetic will work across the entire page.  We need something more
 * specialized.
 */
static void __copy_gigantic_page(struct page *dst, struct page *src,
                                int nr_pages)


-- 
Mike Kravetz

> +					     vma, refs,
> +					     likely(pages) ? pages + i : NULL,
> +					     vmas ? vmas + i : NULL);
>  
> -		if (vmas)
> -			vmas[i] = vma;
> -
> -		vaddr += PAGE_SIZE;
> -		++pfn_offset;
> -		--remainder;
> -		++i;
> -		refs++;
> -		if (vaddr < vma->vm_end && remainder &&
> -				pfn_offset < pages_per_huge_page(h)) {
> -			/*
> -			 * We use pfn_offset to avoid touching the pageframes
> -			 * of this compound page.
> -			 */
> -			goto same_page;
> -		} else if (pages) {
> +		if (pages) {
>  			/*
>  			 * try_grab_compound_head() should always succeed here,
>  			 * because: a) we hold the ptl lock, and b) we've just
> @@ -4950,7 +4952,7 @@ long follow_hugetlb_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  			 * any way. So this page must be available at this
>  			 * point, unless the page refcount overflowed:
>  			 */
> -			if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!try_grab_compound_head(pages[i-1],
> +			if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!try_grab_compound_head(pages[i],
>  								 refs,
>  								 flags))) {
>  				spin_unlock(ptl);
> @@ -4959,6 +4961,11 @@ long follow_hugetlb_page(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  				break;
>  			}
>  		}
> +
> +		vaddr += (refs << PAGE_SHIFT);
> +		remainder -= refs;
> +		i += refs;
> +
>  		spin_unlock(ptl);
>  	}
>  	*nr_pages = remainder;
>