linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/33] Per-VMA locks

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: <CAJuCfpEq2F4EwWAeP6nLqS9m9XLpUss8n=35ZTgYgtiAJyvsxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Jan 2023 16:00:16 -0800
From:   Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, michel@...pinasse.org,
        jglisse@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
        hannes@...xchg.org, mgorman@...hsingularity.net, dave@...olabs.net,
        liam.howlett@...cle.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        ldufour@...ux.ibm.com, paulmck@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        will@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org, songliubraving@...com,
        peterx@...hat.com, david@...hat.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
        hughd@...gle.com, bigeasy@...utronix.de, kent.overstreet@...ux.dev,
        punit.agrawal@...edance.com, lstoakes@...il.com,
        peterjung1337@...il.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
        axelrasmussen@...gle.com, joelaf@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com,
        rppt@...nel.org, jannh@...gle.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
        tatashin@...gle.com, edumazet@...gle.com, gthelen@...gle.com,
        gurua@...gle.com, arjunroy@...gle.com, soheil@...gle.com,
        leewalsh@...gle.com, posk@...gle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/33] Per-VMA locks

On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 3:26 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 02:51:38PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 11:40:37 -0800 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Per-vma locks idea that was discussed during SPF [1] discussion at LSF/MM
> > > last year [2], which concluded with suggestion that “a reader/writer
> > > semaphore could be put into the VMA itself; that would have the effect of
> > > using the VMA as a sort of range lock. There would still be contention at
> > > the VMA level, but it would be an improvement.” This patchset implements
> > > this suggested approach.
> >
> > I think I'll await reviewer/tester input for a while.

Sure, I don't expect the review to be very quick considering the
complexity, however I would appreciate any testing that can be done.

> >
> > > The patchset implements per-VMA locking only for anonymous pages which
> > > are not in swap and avoids userfaultfs as their implementation is more
> > > complex. Additional support for file-back page faults, swapped and user
> > > pages can be added incrementally.
> >
> > This is a significant risk.  How can we be confident that these as yet
> > unimplemented parts are implementable and that the result will be good?
>
> They don't need to be implementable for this patchset to be evaluated
> on its own terms.  This patchset improves scalability for anon pages
> without making file/swap/uffd pages worse (or if it does, I haven't
> seen the benchmarks to prove it).

Making it work for all kinds of page faults would require much more
time. So, this incremental approach, when we tackle the mmap_lock
scalability problem part-by-part seems more doable. Even with
anonymous-only support, the patch shows considerable improvements.
Therefore I would argue that the patch is viable even if it does not
support the above-mentioned cases.

>
> That said, I'm confident that I have a good handle on how to make
> file-backed page faults work under RCU.

Looking forward to collaborating on that!
Thanks,
Suren.