linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] mm/madvise: introduce MADV

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <15da147c-e440-ee87-c505-a4684a5b29dc@oracle.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Feb 2021 11:25:51 -0800
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        "Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        Helge Deller <deller@....de>, Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
        Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm/madvise: introduce MADV_POPULATE to
 prefault/prealloc memory

On 2/19/21 11:14 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> It's interesting to know about commit 1e356fc14be ("mem-prealloc: reduce large
>>> guest start-up and migration time.", 2017-03-14).  It seems for speeding up VM
>>> boot, but what I can't understand is why it would cause the delay of hugetlb
>>> accounting - I thought we'd fail even earlier at either fallocate() on the
>>> hugetlb file (when we use /dev/hugepages) or on mmap() of the memfd which
>>> contains the huge pages.  See hugetlb_reserve_pages() and its callers.  Or did
>>> I miss something?
>>
>> We should fail on mmap() when the reservation happens (unless
>> MAP_NORESERVE is passed) I think.
>>
>>>
>>> I think there's a special case if QEMU fork() with a MAP_PRIVATE hugetlbfs
>>> mapping, that could cause the memory accouting to be delayed until COW happens.
>>
>> That would be kind of weird. I'd assume the reservation gets properly
>> done during fork() - just like for VM_ACCOUNT.
>>
>>> However that's definitely not the case for QEMU since QEMU won't work at all as
>>> late as that point.
>>>
>>> IOW, for hugetlbfs I don't know why we need to populate the pages at all if we
>>> simply want to know "whether we do still have enough space"..  And IIUC 2)
>>> above is the major issue you'd like to solve too.
>>
>> To avoid page faults at runtime on access I think. Reservation <=
>> Preallocation.
> 
> I just learned that there is more to it: (test done on v5.9)
> 
> # echo 512 > /sys/devices/system/node/node0/hugepages/hugepages-2048kB/nr_hugepages
> # cat /sys/devices/system/node/node*/meminfo | grep HugePages_
> Node 0 HugePages_Total:   512
> Node 0 HugePages_Free:    512
> Node 0 HugePages_Surp:      0
> Node 1 HugePages_Total:     0
> Node 1 HugePages_Free:      0
> Node 1 HugePages_Surp:      0
> # cat /proc/meminfo  | grep HugePages_
> HugePages_Total:     512
> HugePages_Free:      512
> HugePages_Rsvd:        0
> HugePages_Surp:        0
> 
> # /usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -m 1G -smp 1 -object memory-backend-memfd,id=mem0,size=1G,hugetlb=on,hugetlbsize=2M,policy=bind,host-nodes=0 -numa node,nodeid=0,memdev=mem0 -hda Fedora-Cloud-Base-Rawhide-20201004.n.1.x86_64.qcow2 -nographic
> -> works just fine
> 
> # /usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -m 1G -smp 1 -object memory-backend-memfd,id=mem0,size=1G,hugetlb=on,hugetlbsize=2M,policy=bind,host-nodes=1 -numa node,nodeid=0,memdev=mem0 -hda Fedora-Cloud-Base-Rawhide-20201004.n.1.x86_64.qcow2 -nographic
> -> Does not fail nicely but crashes!
> 
> 
> See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1686261 for something similar, however, it no longer applies like that on more recent kernels.
> 
> Hugetlbfs reservations don't always protect you (especially with NUMA) - that's why e.g., libvirt always tells QEMU to prealloc.
> 
> I think the "issue" is that the reservation happens on mmap(). mbind() runs afterwards. Preallocation saves you from that.
> 
> I suspect something similar will happen with anonymous memory with mbind() even if we reserved swap space. Did not test yet, though.
> 

Sorry, for jumping in late ... hugetlb keyword just hit my mail filters :)

Yes, it is true that hugetlb reservations are not numa aware.  So, even if
pages are reserved at mmap time one could still SIGBUS if a fault is
restricted to a node with insufficient pages.

I looked into this some years ago, and there really is not a good way to
make hugetlb reservations numa aware.  preallocation, or on demand
populating as proposed here is a way around the issue.
-- 
Mike Kravetz