linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: Skip regions with hugetlbfs pages when allocating 1G 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]

Message-ID: <085983ed-b32a-3ec6-ff4a-a340776c410b@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:20:33 -0700
From:   Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>
To:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <OSalvador@...e.com>,
        Yuanxi Liu <y.liu@...uida.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: Skip regions with hugetlbfs pages when
 allocating 1G pages

On 4/14/2023 7:14 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> A bug was reported by Yuanxi Liu where allocating 1G pages at runtime is
> taking an excessive amount of time for large amounts of memory. Further
> testing allocating huge pages that the cost is linear i.e. if allocating
> 1G pages in batches of 10 then the time to allocate nr_hugepages from
> 10->20->30->etc increases linearly even though 10 pages are allocated at
> each step. Profiles indicated that much of the time is spent checking the
> validity within already existing huge pages and then attempting a migration
> that fails after isolating the range, draining pages and a whole lot of
> other useless work.
> 
> Commit eb14d4eefdc4 ("mm,page_alloc: drop unnecessary checks from
> pfn_range_valid_contig") removed two checks, one which ignored huge pages
> for contiguous allocations as huge pages can sometimes migrate. While
> there may be value on migrating a 2M page to satisfy a 1G allocation, it's
> potentially expensive if the 1G allocation fails and it's pointless to
> try moving a 1G page for a new 1G allocation or scan the tail pages for
> valid PFNs.
> 
> Reintroduce the PageHuge check and assume any contiguous region with
> hugetlbfs pages is unsuitable for a new 1G allocation.
> 
> The hpagealloc test allocates huge pages in batches and reports the
> average latency per page over time. This test happens just after boot when
> fragmentation is not an issue. Units are in milliseconds.
> 
> hpagealloc
>                                 6.3.0-rc6              6.3.0-rc6              6.3.0-rc6
>                                   vanilla   hugeallocrevert-v1r1   hugeallocsimple-v1r2
> Min       Latency       26.42 (   0.00%)        5.07 (  80.82%)       18.94 (  28.30%)
> 1st-qrtle Latency      356.61 (   0.00%)        5.34 (  98.50%)       19.85 (  94.43%)
> 2nd-qrtle Latency      697.26 (   0.00%)        5.47 (  99.22%)       20.44 (  97.07%)
> 3rd-qrtle Latency      972.94 (   0.00%)        5.50 (  99.43%)       20.81 (  97.86%)
> Max-1     Latency       26.42 (   0.00%)        5.07 (  80.82%)       18.94 (  28.30%)
> Max-5     Latency       82.14 (   0.00%)        5.11 (  93.78%)       19.31 (  76.49%)
> Max-10    Latency      150.54 (   0.00%)        5.20 (  96.55%)       19.43 (  87.09%)
> Max-90    Latency     1164.45 (   0.00%)        5.53 (  99.52%)       20.97 (  98.20%)
> Max-95    Latency     1223.06 (   0.00%)        5.55 (  99.55%)       21.06 (  98.28%)
> Max-99    Latency     1278.67 (   0.00%)        5.57 (  99.56%)       22.56 (  98.24%)
> Max       Latency     1310.90 (   0.00%)        8.06 (  99.39%)       26.62 (  97.97%)
> Amean     Latency      678.36 (   0.00%)        5.44 *  99.20%*       20.44 *  96.99%*
> 
>                     6.3.0-rc6   6.3.0-rc6   6.3.0-rc6
>                       vanilla   revert-v1   hugeallocfix-v2
> Duration User           0.28        0.27        0.30
> Duration System       808.66       17.77       35.99
> Duration Elapsed      830.87       18.08       36.33
> 
> The vanilla kernel is poor, taking up to 1.3 second to allocate a huge page
> and almost 10 minutes in total to run the test. Reverting the problematic
> commit reduces it to 8ms at worst and the patch takes 26ms. This patch
> fixes the main issue with skipping huge pages but leaves the page_count()
> out because a page with an elevated count potentially can migrate.
> 
A while ago I submitted this patch set that should significantly improve
the chances of a 2MB Huge Page being successfully migrated:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20220921223639.1152392-1-opendmb@gmail.com/

Unfortunately, it is collecting dust and needs to be updated to support 
Folios, but I would be curious how it affects the performance of this test.

> BugLink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217022
> Fixes: eb14d4eefdc4 ("mm,page_alloc: drop unnecessary checks from pfn_range_valid_contig")
> Reported-by: Yuanxi Liu <y.liu@...uida.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
> ---
>   mm/page_alloc.c | 3 +++
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 7136c36c5d01..b47f520c3051 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -9450,6 +9450,9 @@ static bool pfn_range_valid_contig(struct zone *z, unsigned long start_pfn,
>   
>   		if (PageReserved(page))
>   			return false;
> +
> +		if (PageHuge(page))
> +			return false;
>   	}
>   	return true;
>   }
> 

I am OK with this patch too, but I could resubmit my patch with Mike's 
suggested variant and Folio support if anyone wants to try it instead of 
this approach.

Regards,
     Doug