linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 08/11] hugetlb: batch freeing of vmemmap 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: <20230907184759.GC3640@monkey>
Date:   Thu, 7 Sep 2023 11:47:59 -0700
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To:     Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>
Cc:     Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
        Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@...ux.dev>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Xiongchun Duan <duanxiongchun@...edance.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/11] hugetlb: batch freeing of vmemmap pages

On 09/07/23 14:19, Muchun Song wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Sep 7, 2023, at 05:38, Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On 09/06/23 15:38, Muchun Song wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On 2023/9/6 05:44, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> >>> Now that batching of hugetlb vmemmap optimization processing is possible,
> >>> batch the freeing of vmemmap pages.  When freeing vmemmap pages for a
> >>> hugetlb page, we add them to a list that is freed after the entire batch
> >>> has been processed.
> >>> 
> >>> This enhances the ability to return contiguous ranges of memory to the
> >>> low level allocators.
> >>> 
> >>> Signed-off-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  mm/hugetlb_vmemmap.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> >>>  1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >>> 
> >>> diff --git a/mm/hugetlb_vmemmap.c b/mm/hugetlb_vmemmap.c
> >>> index 79de984919ef..a715712df831 100644
> >>> --- a/mm/hugetlb_vmemmap.c
> >>> +++ b/mm/hugetlb_vmemmap.c
> >>> @@ -306,18 +306,21 @@ static void vmemmap_restore_pte(pte_t *pte, unsigned long addr,
> >>>   * @end: end address of the vmemmap virtual address range that we want to
> >>>   * remap.
> >>>   * @reuse: reuse address.
> >>> + * @vmemmap_pages: list to deposit vmemmap pages to be freed.  It is callers
> >>> + * responsibility to free pages.
> >>>   *
> >>>   * Return: %0 on success, negative error code otherwise.
> >>>   */
> >>>  static int vmemmap_remap_free(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
> >>> -       unsigned long reuse)
> >>> +       unsigned long reuse,
> >>> +       struct list_head *vmemmap_pages)
> >>>  {
> >>>   int ret;
> >>> - LIST_HEAD(vmemmap_pages);
> >>> + LIST_HEAD(freed_pages);
> >> 
> >> IIUC, we could reuse the parameter of @vmemmap_pages directly instead of
> >> a temporary variable, could it be dropped?
> >> 
> > 
> > I was concerned about the error case where we call vmemmap_remap_range a
> > second time.  In the first call to vmemmap_remap_range with vmemmap_remap_pte,
> > vmemmap pages to be freed are added to the end of the list (list_add_tail).
> > In the call to vmemmap_remap_range after error with vmemmap_restore_pte,
> > pages are taken off the head of the list (list_first_entry).  So, it seems
> > that it would be possible to use a different set of pages in the restore
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > operation.  This would be an issue if pages had different characteristics such
> > as being on different nodes.  Is that a real concern?
> 
> A good point. Now I see your concern, it is better to keep the same node
> as before when error occurs.
> 
> > 
> > I suppose we could change vmemmap_remap_pte to add pages to the head of
> > the list?  I do not recall the reasoning behind adding to tail.
> 
> I think we could do this, the code will be a little simple. Actually, there
> is no reason behind adding to tail (BTW, the first commit is introduced by
> me, no secret here :-)).

Ok, I will change the way pages are added and removed from the list so
that in case of error we get the same pages.  Then I can remove the
local list.
-- 
Mike Kravetz