| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CA+EESO5nvzka0KzFGzdGgiCWPLg7XD-8jA9=NTUOKFy-56orUg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 17:29:08 +0100
From: Lokesh Gidra <lokeshgidra@...gle.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
aarcange@...hat.com, peterx@...hat.com, hughd@...gle.com,
mhocko@...e.com, axelrasmussen@...gle.com, rppt@...nel.org,
willy@...radead.org, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, jannh@...gle.com,
zhangpeng362@...wei.com, bgeffon@...gle.com,
kaleshsingh@...gle.com, ngeoffray@...gle.com, jdduke@...gle.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] userfaultfd: UFFDIO_MOVE uABI
On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 5:24 PM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 09.10.23 18:21, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 7:38 AM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 09.10.23 08:42, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> >>> From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
> >>>
> >>> Implement the uABI of UFFDIO_MOVE ioctl.
> >>> UFFDIO_COPY performs ~20% better than UFFDIO_MOVE when the application
> >>> needs pages to be allocated [1]. However, with UFFDIO_MOVE, if pages are
> >>> available (in userspace) for recycling, as is usually the case in heap
> >>> compaction algorithms, then we can avoid the page allocation and memcpy
> >>> (done by UFFDIO_COPY). Also, since the pages are recycled in the
> >>> userspace, we avoid the need to release (via madvise) the pages back to
> >>> the kernel [2].
> >>> We see over 40% reduction (on a Google pixel 6 device) in the compacting
> >>> thread’s completion time by using UFFDIO_MOVE vs. UFFDIO_COPY. This was
> >>> measured using a benchmark that emulates a heap compaction implementation
> >>> using userfaultfd (to allow concurrent accesses by application threads).
> >>> More details of the usecase are explained in [2].
> >>> Furthermore, UFFDIO_MOVE enables moving swapped-out pages without
> >>> touching them within the same vma. Today, it can only be done by mremap,
> >>> however it forces splitting the vma.
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/1425575884-2574-1-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com/
> >>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CA+EESO4uO84SSnBhArH4HvLNhaUQ5nZKNKXqxRCyjniNVjp0Aw@mail.gmail.com/
> >>>
> >>> Update for the ioctl_userfaultfd(2) manpage:
> >>>
> >>> UFFDIO_MOVE
> >>> (Since Linux xxx) Move a continuous memory chunk into the
> >>> userfault registered range and optionally wake up the blocked
> >>> thread. The source and destination addresses and the number of
> >>> bytes to move are specified by the src, dst, and len fields of
> >>> the uffdio_move structure pointed to by argp:
> >>>
> >>> struct uffdio_move {
> >>> __u64 dst; /* Destination of move */
> >>> __u64 src; /* Source of move */
> >>> __u64 len; /* Number of bytes to move */
> >>> __u64 mode; /* Flags controlling behavior of move */
> >>> __s64 move; /* Number of bytes moved, or negated error */
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>> The following value may be bitwise ORed in mode to change the
> >>> behavior of the UFFDIO_MOVE operation:
> >>>
> >>> UFFDIO_MOVE_MODE_DONTWAKE
> >>> Do not wake up the thread that waits for page-fault
> >>> resolution
> >>>
> >>> UFFDIO_MOVE_MODE_ALLOW_SRC_HOLES
> >>> Allow holes in the source virtual range that is being moved.
> >>> When not specified, the holes will result in ENOENT error.
> >>> When specified, the holes will be accounted as successfully
> >>> moved memory. This is mostly useful to move hugepage aligned
> >>> virtual regions without knowing if there are transparent
> >>> hugepages in the regions or not, but preventing the risk of
> >>> having to split the hugepage during the operation.
> >>>
> >>> The move field is used by the kernel to return the number of
> >>> bytes that was actually moved, or an error (a negated errno-
> >>> style value). If the value returned in move doesn't match the
> >>> value that was specified in len, the operation fails with the
> >>> error EAGAIN. The move field is output-only; it is not read by
> >>> the UFFDIO_MOVE operation.
> >>>
> >>> The operation may fail for various reasons. Usually, remapping of
> >>> pages that are not exclusive to the given process fail; once KSM
> >>> might deduplicate pages or fork() COW-shares pages during fork()
> >>> with child processes, they are no longer exclusive. Further, the
> >>> kernel might only perform lightweight checks for detecting whether
> >>> the pages are exclusive, and return -EBUSY in case that check fails.
> >>> To make the operation more likely to succeed, KSM should be
> >>> disabled, fork() should be avoided or MADV_DONTFORK should be
> >>> configured for the source VMA before fork().
> >>>
> >>> This ioctl(2) operation returns 0 on success. In this case, the
> >>> entire area was moved. On error, -1 is returned and errno is
> >>> set to indicate the error. Possible errors include:
> >>>
> >>> EAGAIN The number of bytes moved (i.e., the value returned in
> >>> the move field) does not equal the value that was
> >>> specified in the len field.
> >>>
> >>> EINVAL Either dst or len was not a multiple of the system page
> >>> size, or the range specified by src and len or dst and len
> >>> was invalid.
> >>>
> >>> EINVAL An invalid bit was specified in the mode field.
> >>>
> >>> ENOENT
> >>> The source virtual memory range has unmapped holes and
> >>> UFFDIO_MOVE_MODE_ALLOW_SRC_HOLES is not set.
> >>>
> >>> EEXIST
> >>> The destination virtual memory range is fully or partially
> >>> mapped.
> >>>
> >>> EBUSY
> >>> The pages in the source virtual memory range are not
> >>> exclusive to the process. The kernel might only perform
> >>> lightweight checks for detecting whether the pages are
> >>> exclusive. To make the operation more likely to succeed,
> >>> KSM should be disabled, fork() should be avoided or
> >>> MADV_DONTFORK should be configured for the source virtual
> >>> memory area before fork().
> >>>
> >>> ENOMEM Allocating memory needed for the operation failed.
> >>>
> >>> ESRCH
> >>> The faulting process has exited at the time of a
> >>> UFFDIO_MOVE operation.
> >>>
> >>
> >> A general comment simply because I realized that just now: does anything
> >> speak against limiting the operations now to a single MM?
> >>
> >> The use cases I heard so far don't need it. If ever required, we could
> >> consider extending it.
> >>
> >> Let's reduce complexity and KIS unless really required.
> >
> > Let me check if there are use cases that require moves between MMs.
> > Andrea seems to have put considerable effort to make it work between
> > MMs and it would be a pity to lose that. I can send a follow-up patch
> > to recover that functionality and even if it does not get merged, it
> > can be used in the future as a reference. But first let me check if we
> > can drop it.
For the compaction use case that we have it's fine to limit it to
single MM. However, for general use I think Peter will have a better
idea.
>
> Yes, that sounds reasonable. Unless the big important use cases requires
> moving pages between processes, let's leave that as future work for now.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> David / dhildenb
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists