linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: swap: mTHP swap allocator base on swap cluster order

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: <CANeU7QkmQ+bJoFnr-ca-xp_dP1XgEKNSwb489MYVqynP_Q8Ddw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 14:04:34 -0700
From: Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Kairui Song <kasong@...cent.com>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>, 
	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: swap: mTHP swap allocator base on swap cluster order

I am spinning a new version for this series to address two issues
found in this series:

1) Oppo discovered a bug in the following line:
+               ci = si->cluster_info + tmp;
Should be "tmp / SWAPFILE_CLUSTER" instead of "tmp".
That is a serious bug but trivial to fix.

2) order 0 allocation currently blindly scans swap_map disregarding
the cluster->order. Given enough order 0 swap allocations(close to the
swap file size) the order 0 allocation head will eventually sweep
across the whole swapfile and destroy other cluster order allocations.

The short term fix is just skipping clusters that are already assigned
to higher orders.

In the long term, I want to unify the non-SSD to use clusters for
locking and allocations as well, just try to follow the last
allocation (less seeking) as much as possible.

Chris



On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 10:17 AM Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> This is the short term solutiolns "swap cluster order" listed
> in my "Swap Abstraction" discussion slice 8 in the recent
> LSF/MM conference.
>
> When commit 845982eb264bc "mm: swap: allow storage of all mTHP
> orders" is introduced, it only allocates the mTHP swap entries
> from new empty cluster list. That works well for PMD size THP,
> but it has a serius fragmentation issue reported by Barry.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAGsJ_4zAcJkuW016Cfi6wicRr8N9X+GJJhgMQdSMp+Ah+NSgNQ@mail.gmail.com/
>
> The mTHP allocation failure rate raises to almost 100% after a few
> hours in Barry's test run.
>
> The reason is that all the empty cluster has been exhausted while
> there are planty of free swap entries to in the cluster that is
> not 100% free.
>
> Address this by remember the swap allocation order in the cluster.
> Keep track of the per order non full cluster list for later allocation.
>
> This greatly improve the sucess rate of the mTHP swap allocation.
> While I am still waiting for Barry's test result. I paste Kairui's test
> result here:
>
> I'm able to reproduce such an issue with a simple script (enabling all order of mthp):
>
> modprobe brd rd_nr=1 rd_size=$(( 10 * 1024 * 1024))
> swapoff -a
> mkswap /dev/ram0
> swapon /dev/ram0
>
> rmdir /sys/fs/cgroup/benchmark
> mkdir -p /sys/fs/cgroup/benchmark
> cd /sys/fs/cgroup/benchmark
> echo 8G > memory.max
> echo $$ > cgroup.procs
>
> memcached -u nobody -m 16384 -s /tmp/memcached.socket -a 0766 -t 32 -B binary &
>
> /usr/local/bin/memtier_benchmark -S /tmp/memcached.socket \
>         -P memcache_binary -n allkeys --key-minimum=1 \
>         --key-maximum=18000000 --key-pattern=P:P -c 1 -t 32 \
>         --ratio 1:0 --pipeline 8 -d 1024
>
> Before:
> Totals      48805.63         0.00         0.00         5.26045         1.19100        38.91100        59.64700     51063.98
> After:
> Totals      71098.84         0.00         0.00         3.60585         0.71100        26.36700        39.16700     74388.74
>
> And the fallback ratio dropped by a lot:
> Before:
> hugepages-32kB/stats/anon_swpout_fallback:15997
> hugepages-32kB/stats/anon_swpout:18712
> hugepages-512kB/stats/anon_swpout_fallback:192
> hugepages-512kB/stats/anon_swpout:0
> hugepages-2048kB/stats/anon_swpout_fallback:2
> hugepages-2048kB/stats/anon_swpout:0
> hugepages-1024kB/stats/anon_swpout_fallback:0
> hugepages-1024kB/stats/anon_swpout:0
> hugepages-64kB/stats/anon_swpout_fallback:18246
> hugepages-64kB/stats/anon_swpout:17644
> hugepages-16kB/stats/anon_swpout_fallback:13701
> hugepages-16kB/stats/anon_swpout:18234
> hugepages-256kB/stats/anon_swpout_fallback:8642
> hugepages-256kB/stats/anon_swpout:93
> hugepages-128kB/stats/anon_swpout_fallback:21497
> hugepages-128kB/stats/anon_swpout:7596
>
> (Still collecting more data, the success swpout was mostly done early, then the fallback began to increase, nearly 100% failure rate)
>
> After:
> hugepages-32kB/stats/swpout:34445
> hugepages-32kB/stats/swpout_fallback:0
> hugepages-512kB/stats/swpout:1
> hugepages-512kB/stats/swpout_fallback:134
> hugepages-2048kB/stats/swpout:1
> hugepages-2048kB/stats/swpout_fallback:1
> hugepages-1024kB/stats/swpout:6
> hugepages-1024kB/stats/swpout_fallback:0
> hugepages-64kB/stats/swpout:35495
> hugepages-64kB/stats/swpout_fallback:0
> hugepages-16kB/stats/swpout:32441
> hugepages-16kB/stats/swpout_fallback:0
> hugepages-256kB/stats/swpout:2223
> hugepages-256kB/stats/swpout_fallback:6278
> hugepages-128kB/stats/swpout:29136
> hugepages-128kB/stats/swpout_fallback:52
>
> Reported-by: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
> Tested-by: Kairui Song <kasong@...cent.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>
> ---
> Chris Li (2):
>       mm: swap: swap cluster switch to double link list
>       mm: swap: mTHP allocate swap entries from nonfull list
>
>  include/linux/swap.h |  18 ++--
>  mm/swapfile.c        | 252 +++++++++++++++++----------------------------------
>  2 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 177 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: c65920c76a977c2b73c3a8b03b4c0c00cc1285ed
> change-id: 20240523-swap-allocator-1534c480ece4
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>
>