[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230706003252.sj57tjmqb77yflqq@revolver>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2023 20:32:52 -0400
From: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
jirislaby@...nel.org, jacobly.alt@...il.com,
holger@...lied-asynchrony.com, hdegoede@...hat.com,
michel@...pinasse.org, jglisse@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com,
vbabka@...e.cz, hannes@...xchg.org, mgorman@...hsingularity.net,
dave@...olabs.net, willy@...radead.org, peterz@...radead.org,
ldufour@...ux.ibm.com, paulmck@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
will@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org, songliubraving@...com,
peterx@...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, chriscli@...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,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] fork: lock VMAs of the parent process when forking
* Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com> [230705 20:20]:
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 4:07 PM Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com> wrote:
> >
> > * Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com> [230705 13:24]:
> > > On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 10:14 AM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 05.07.23 19:12, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > > > When forking a child process, parent write-protects an anonymous page
> > > > > and COW-shares it with the child being forked using copy_present_pte().
> > > > > Parent's TLB is flushed right before we drop the parent's mmap_lock in
> > > > > dup_mmap(). If we get a write-fault before that TLB flush in the parent,
> > > > > and we end up replacing that anonymous page in the parent process in
> > > > > do_wp_page() (because, COW-shared with the child), this might lead to
> > > > > some stale writable TLB entries targeting the wrong (old) page.
> > > > > Similar issue happened in the past with userfaultfd (see flush_tlb_page()
> > > > > call inside do_wp_page()).
> > > > > Lock VMAs of the parent process when forking a child, which prevents
> > > > > concurrent page faults during fork operation and avoids this issue.
> > > > > This fix can potentially regress some fork-heavy workloads. Kernel build
> > > > > time did not show noticeable regression on a 56-core machine while a
> > > > > stress test mapping 10000 VMAs and forking 5000 times in a tight loop
> > > > > shows ~5% regression. If such fork time regression is unacceptable,
> > > > > disabling CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK should restore its performance. Further
> > > > > optimizations are possible if this regression proves to be problematic.
> > > > >
> > > > > Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> > > > > Reported-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
> > > > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/dbdef34c-3a07-5951-e1ae-e9c6e3cdf51b@kernel.org/
> > > > > Reported-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@...lied-asynchrony.com>
> > > > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/b198d649-f4bf-b971-31d0-e8433ec2a34c@applied-asynchrony.com/
> > > > > Reported-by: Jacob Young <jacobly.alt@...il.com>
> > > > > Closes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217624
> > > > > Fixes: 0bff0aaea03e ("x86/mm: try VMA lock-based page fault handling first")
> > > > > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > kernel/fork.c | 6 ++++++
> > > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
> > > > > index b85814e614a5..403bc2b72301 100644
> > > > > --- a/kernel/fork.c
> > > > > +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> > > > > @@ -658,6 +658,12 @@ static __latent_entropy int dup_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > > > > retval = -EINTR;
> > > > > goto fail_uprobe_end;
> > > > > }
> > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PER_VMA_LOCK
> > > > > + /* Disallow any page faults before calling flush_cache_dup_mm */
> > > > > + for_each_vma(old_vmi, mpnt)
> > > > > + vma_start_write(mpnt);
> > > > > + vma_iter_init(&old_vmi, oldmm, 0);
> >
> > vma_iter_set(&old_vmi, 0) is probably what you want here.
>
> Ok, I send another version with that.
>
> >
> > > > > +#endif
> > > > > flush_cache_dup_mm(oldmm);
> > > > > uprobe_dup_mmap(oldmm, mm);
> > > > > /*
> > > >
> > > > The old version was most probably fine as well, but this certainly looks
> > > > even safer.
> > > >
> > > > Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> >
> > I think this is overkill and believe setting the vma_start_write() will
> > synchronize with any readers since it's using the per-vma rw semaphore
> > in write mode. Anything faulting will need to finish before the fork
> > continues and faults during the fork will fall back to a read lock of
> > the mmap_lock. Is there a possibility of populate happening outside the
> > mmap_write lock/vma_lock?
>
> Yes, I think we understand the loss of concurrency in the parent's
> ability to fault pages while forking. Is that a real problem though?
No, I don't think that part is an issue at all. I wanted to be sure I
didn't miss something.
>
> >
> > Was your benchmarking done with this loop at the start?
>
> No, it was done with the initial version where the lock was inside the
> existing loop. I just reran the benchmark and while kernel compilation
> times did not change, the stress test shows ~7% regression now,
> probably due to that additional tree walk. I'll update that number in
> the new patch.
..but I expected a performance hit and didn't understand why you updated
the patch this way. It would probably only happen on really big trees
though and, ah, the largest trees I see are from the android side. I'd
wager the impact will be felt more when larger trees encounter smaller
CPU cache.
Thanks,
Liam
Powered by blists - more mailing lists