[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZDzhqxShqmmQOKjU@kroah.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:05:31 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, david@...hat.com,
patches@...ts.linux.dev, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pmladek@...e.com,
petr.pavlu@...e.com, prarit@...hat.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, rafael@...nel.org,
christophe.leroy@...roup.eu, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, song@...nel.org, rppt@...nel.org,
dave@...olabs.net, willy@...radead.org, vbabka@...e.cz,
mhocko@...e.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
colin.i.king@...il.com, jim.cromie@...il.com,
catalin.marinas@....com, jbaron@...mai.com,
rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] kread: avoid duplicates
On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 11:46:44AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 02:50:01PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 11:41:28PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 11:04:12PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 10:28:40PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > > > With this we run into 0 wasted virtual memory bytes.
> > > >
> > > > Avoid what duplicates?
> > >
> > > David Hildenbrand had reported that with over 400 CPUs vmap space
> > > runs out and it seems it was related to module loading. I took a
> > > look and confirmed it. Module loading ends up requiring in the
> > > worst case 3 vmalloc allocations, so typically at least twice
> > > the size of the module size and in the worst case just add
> > > the decompressed module size:
> > >
> > > a) initial kernel_read*() call
> > > b) optional module decompression
> > > c) the actual module data copy we will keep
> > >
> > > Duplicate module requests that come from userspace end up being thrown
> > > in the trash bin, as only one module will be allocated. Although there
> > > are checks for a module prior to requesting a module udev still doesn't
> > > do the best of a job to avoid that and so we end up with tons of
> > > duplicate module requests. We're talking about gigabytes of vmalloc
> > > bytes just lost because of this for large systems and megabytes for
> > > average systems. So for example with just 255 CPUs we can loose about
> > > 13.58 GiB, and for 8 CPUs about 226.53 MiB.
> >
> > How does the memory get "lost"? Shouldn't it be properly freed when the
> > duplicate module load fails?
>
> Yes memory gets freed, but since virtual memory space can be limitted it
> also means you can end up eventually getting to the point -ENOMEMs will
> happen as you have more CPUS and you cannot use virtual memory for other
> things during kernel bootup and bootup fails. This is apparently
> exacerbated with KASAN enabled.
Then why not just rate-limit the module loader in userspace on such
large systems if that's an issue? No kernel changes needed to do that.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists