linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/2] mm: disable LRU pagevec during the migration temporarily

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]

Date:   Thu, 18 Feb 2021 09:24:27 +0100
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, cgoldswo@...eaurora.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, vbabka@...e.cz,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, joaodias@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] mm: disable LRU pagevec during the migration
 temporarily

On 18.02.21 09:17, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 17-02-21 13:32:05, Minchan Kim wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 09:16:12PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 12:46:19PM -0800, Minchan Kim wrote:
>>>>> I suspect you do not want to add atomic_read inside hot paths, right? Is
>>>>> this really something that we have to microoptimize for? atomic_read is
>>>>> a simple READ_ONCE on many archs.
>>>>
>>>> It's also spin_lock_irq_save in some arch. If the new synchonization is
>>>> heavily compilcated, atomic would be better for simple start but I thought
>>>> this locking scheme is too simple so no need to add atomic operation in
>>>> readside.
>>>
>>> What arch uses a spinlock for atomic_read()?  I just had a quick grep and
>>> didn't see any.
>>
>> Ah, my bad. I was confused with update side.
>> Okay, let's use atomic op to make it simple.
> 
> Thanks. This should make the code much more simple. Before you send
> another version for the review I have another thing to consider. You are
> kind of wiring this into the migration code but control over lru pcp
> caches can be used in other paths as well. Memory offlining would be
> another user. We already disable page allocator pcp caches to prevent
> regular draining. We could do the same with lru pcp caches.
> 

Agreed. And dealing with PCP more reliably might also be of interest in 
context of more reliable alloc_contig_range().

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb