linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/7] mm: free user PTE page table pages

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:   Mon, 19 Jul 2021 01:01:10 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To:     Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de, hannes@...xchg.org,
        mhocko@...nel.org, vdavydov.dev@...il.com,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, songmuchun@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] mm: free user PTE page table pages

On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 12:30:31PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote:
> Some malloc libraries(e.g. jemalloc or tcmalloc) usually
> allocate the amount of VAs by mmap() and do not unmap
> those VAs. They will use madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) to free
> physical memory if they want. But the page tables do not
> be freed by madvise(), so it can produce many page tables
> when the process touches an enormous virtual address space.
> 
> The following figures are a memory usage snapshot of one
> process which actually happened on our server:
> 
>         VIRT:  55t
>         RES:   590g
>         VmPTE: 110g
> 
> As we can see, the PTE page tables size is 110g, while the
> RES is 590g. In theory, the process only need 1.2g PTE page
> tables to map those physical memory. The reason why PTE page
> tables occupy a lot of memory is that madvise(MADV_DONTNEED)
> only empty the PTE and free physical memory but doesn't free
> the PTE page table pages. So we can free those empty PTE page
> tables to save memory. In the above cases, we can save memory
> about 108g(best case). And the larger the difference between
> the size of VIRT and RES, the more memory we save.
> 
> In this patch series, we add a pte_refcount field to the
> struct page of page table to track how many users of PTE page
> table. Similar to the mechanism of page refcount, the user of
> PTE page table should hold a refcount to it before accessing.
> The PTE page table page will be freed when the last refcount
> is dropped.

The patch is very hard to review.

Could you split up introduction of the new API in the separate patch? With
a proper documentation of the API.

Why pte_refcount is atomic? Looks like you do everything under pmd_lock().
Do I miss something?

And performance numbers should be included. I don't expect pmd_lock() in
all hotpaths to scale well.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov