| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:31:05 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Peng Zhang <zhangpeng.00@...edance.com>, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
corbet@....net, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, willy@...radead.org,
brauner@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com, michael.christie@...cle.com,
mjguzik@...il.com, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, npiggin@...il.com,
peterz@...radead.org, oliver.sang@...el.com, mst@...hat.com
Cc: maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/10] fork: Use __mt_dup() to duplicate maple tree in
dup_mmap()
On 20.02.24 18:24, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 27.10.23 05:38, Peng Zhang wrote:
>> In dup_mmap(), using __mt_dup() to duplicate the old maple tree and then
>> directly replacing the entries of VMAs in the new maple tree can result
>> in better performance. __mt_dup() uses DFS pre-order to duplicate the
>> maple tree, so it is efficient.
>>
>> The average time complexity of __mt_dup() is O(n), where n is the number
>> of VMAs. The proof of the time complexity is provided in the commit log
>> that introduces __mt_dup(). After duplicating the maple tree, each element
>> is traversed and replaced (ignoring the cases of deletion, which are rare).
>> Since it is only a replacement operation for each element, this process is
>> also O(n).
>>
>> Analyzing the exact time complexity of the previous algorithm is
>> challenging because each insertion can involve appending to a node, pushing
>> data to adjacent nodes, or even splitting nodes. The frequency of each
>> action is difficult to calculate. The worst-case scenario for a single
>> insertion is when the tree undergoes splitting at every level. If we
>> consider each insertion as the worst-case scenario, we can determine that
>> the upper bound of the time complexity is O(n*log(n)), although this is a
>> loose upper bound. However, based on the test data, it appears that the
>> actual time complexity is likely to be O(n).
>>
>> As the entire maple tree is duplicated using __mt_dup(), if dup_mmap()
>> fails, there will be a portion of VMAs that have not been duplicated in
>> the maple tree. To handle this, we mark the failure point with
>> XA_ZERO_ENTRY. In exit_mmap(), if this marker is encountered, stop
>> releasing VMAs that have not been duplicated after this point.
>>
>> There is a "spawn" in byte-unixbench[1], which can be used to test the
>> performance of fork(). I modified it slightly to make it work with
>> different number of VMAs.
>>
>> Below are the test results. The first row shows the number of VMAs.
>> The second and third rows show the number of fork() calls per ten seconds,
>> corresponding to next-20231006 and the this patchset, respectively. The
>> test results were obtained with CPU binding to avoid scheduler load
>> balancing that could cause unstable results. There are still some
>> fluctuations in the test results, but at least they are better than the
>> original performance.
>>
>> 21 121 221 421 821 1621 3221 6421 12821 25621 51221
>> 112100 76261 54227 34035 20195 11112 6017 3161 1606 802 393
>> 114558 83067 65008 45824 28751 16072 8922 4747 2436 1233 599
>> 2.19% 8.92% 19.88% 34.64% 42.37% 44.64% 48.28% 50.17% 51.68% 53.74% 52.42%
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/kdlucas/byte-unixbench/tree/master
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peng Zhang <zhangpeng.00@...edance.com>
>> Suggested-by: Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
>> ---
>> include/linux/mm.h | 11 +++++++++++
>> kernel/fork.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>> mm/internal.h | 11 -----------
>> mm/memory.c | 7 ++++++-
>> mm/mmap.c | 9 ++++++---
>> 5 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
>> index 14d5aaff96d0..e9111ec5808c 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
>> @@ -996,6 +996,17 @@ static inline int vma_iter_bulk_alloc(struct vma_iterator *vmi,
>> return mas_expected_entries(&vmi->mas, count);
>> }
>>
>> +static inline int vma_iter_clear_gfp(struct vma_iterator *vmi,
>> + unsigned long start, unsigned long end, gfp_t gfp)
>> +{
>> + __mas_set_range(&vmi->mas, start, end - 1);
>> + mas_store_gfp(&vmi->mas, NULL, gfp);
>> + if (unlikely(mas_is_err(&vmi->mas)))
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> /* Free any unused preallocations */
>> static inline void vma_iter_free(struct vma_iterator *vmi)
>> {
>> diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
>> index 1e6c656e0857..1552ee66517b 100644
>> --- a/kernel/fork.c
>> +++ b/kernel/fork.c
>> @@ -650,7 +650,6 @@ static __latent_entropy int dup_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm,
>> int retval;
>> unsigned long charge = 0;
>> LIST_HEAD(uf);
>> - VMA_ITERATOR(old_vmi, oldmm, 0);
>> VMA_ITERATOR(vmi, mm, 0);
>>
>> uprobe_start_dup_mmap();
>> @@ -678,16 +677,22 @@ static __latent_entropy int dup_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm,
>> goto out;
>> khugepaged_fork(mm, oldmm);
>>
>> - retval = vma_iter_bulk_alloc(&vmi, oldmm->map_count);
>> - if (retval)
>> + /* Use __mt_dup() to efficiently build an identical maple tree. */
>> + retval = __mt_dup(&oldmm->mm_mt, &mm->mm_mt, GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (unlikely(retval))
>> goto out;
>>
>> mt_clear_in_rcu(vmi.mas.tree);
>> - for_each_vma(old_vmi, mpnt) {
>> + for_each_vma(vmi, mpnt) {
>> struct file *file;
>>
>> vma_start_write(mpnt);
>
> We used to call vma_start_write() on the *old* VMA, to prevent any kind of page faults in
> the old MM while we are duplicating PTEs (and COW-share pages).
>
> See
>
> commit fb49c455323ff8319a123dd312be9082c49a23a5
> Author: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> Date: Sat Jul 8 12:12:12 2023 -0700
>
> fork: lock VMAs of the parent process when forking
>
> When forking a child process, the parent write-protects anonymous pages
> and COW-shares them with the child being forked using copy_present_pte().
>
> We must not take any concurrent page faults on the source vma's as they
> are being processed, as we expect both the vma and the pte's behind it
> to be stable. For example, the anon_vma_fork() expects the parents
> vma->anon_vma to not change during the vma copy.
>
>
> Unless I am missing something, we now call vma_start_write() on the *new* VMA?
>
> If that is the case, this is broken and needs fixing; likely, going over all
> VMAs in the old_mm and calling vma_start_write().
>
> But maybe there is some magic going on that I am missing :)
.. likely the magic is that the new tree links the same VMAs (we are
not duplicating the VMAs before vm_area_dup()), so we are indeed locking
the MM in the old_mm (that is temporarily linked into the new MM).
If that's the case, all good :)
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists