| 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: <CAGsJ_4wCPHxdXOBeaP6T4Rv_QHjLhL+LCZH-r2fwCrCBDk42_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:42:43 +1300
From: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
To: Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, chrisl@...nel.org, david@...hat.com,
kasong@...cent.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, ryan.roberts@....com, v-songbaohua@...o.com,
x86@...nel.org, ying.huang@...el.com, zhengtangquan@...o.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] mm: Avoid splitting pmd for lazyfree pmd-mapped
THP in try_to_unmap
On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 7:26 PM Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 1:09 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 6:01 PM Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 11:38 AM Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>
> > > >
> > > > The try_to_unmap_one() function currently handles PMD-mapped THPs
> > > > inefficiently. It first splits the PMD into PTEs, copies the dirty
> > > > state from the PMD to the PTEs, iterates over the PTEs to locate
> > > > the dirty state, and then marks the THP as swap-backed. This process
> > > > involves unnecessary PMD splitting and redundant iteration. Instead,
> > > > this functionality can be efficiently managed in
> > > > __discard_anon_folio_pmd_locked(), avoiding the extra steps and
> > > > improving performance.
> > > >
> > > > The following microbenchmark redirties folios after invoking MADV_FREE,
> > > > then measures the time taken to perform memory reclamation (actually
> > > > set those folios swapbacked again) on the redirtied folios.
> > > >
> > > > #include <stdio.h>
> > > > #include <sys/mman.h>
> > > > #include <string.h>
> > > > #include <time.h>
> > > >
> > > > #define SIZE 128*1024*1024 // 128 MB
> > > >
> > > > int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> > > > {
> > > > while(1) {
> > > > volatile int *p = mmap(0, SIZE, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE,
> > > > MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
> > > >
> > > > memset((void *)p, 1, SIZE);
> > > > madvise((void *)p, SIZE, MADV_FREE);
> > > > /* redirty after MADV_FREE */
> > > > memset((void *)p, 1, SIZE);
> > > >
> > > > clock_t start_time = clock();
> > > > madvise((void *)p, SIZE, MADV_PAGEOUT);
> > > > clock_t end_time = clock();
> > > >
> > > > double elapsed_time = (double)(end_time - start_time) / CLOCKS_PER_SEC;
> > > > printf("Time taken by reclamation: %f seconds\n", elapsed_time);
> > > >
> > > > munmap((void *)p, SIZE);
> > > > }
> > > > return 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > Testing results are as below,
> > > > w/o patch:
> > > > ~ # ./a.out
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007300 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007226 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007295 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007731 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007134 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007285 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007720 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007128 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007710 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007712 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007236 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007690 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007174 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007670 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007169 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007305 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007432 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007158 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.007133 seconds
> > > > …
> > > >
> > > > w/ patch
> > > >
> > > > ~ # ./a.out
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002124 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002116 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002150 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002261 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002137 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002173 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002063 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002088 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002169 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002124 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002111 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002224 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002297 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002260 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002246 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002272 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002277 seconds
> > > > Time taken by reclamation: 0.002462 seconds
> > > > …
> > > >
> > > > This patch significantly speeds up try_to_unmap_one() by allowing it
> > > > to skip redirtied THPs without splitting the PMD.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
> > > > Suggested-by: Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > mm/huge_memory.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++-------
> > > > mm/rmap.c | 13 ++++++++++---
> > > > 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
> > > > index 3d3ebdc002d5..47cc8c3f8f80 100644
> > > > --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
> > > > +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
> > > > @@ -3070,8 +3070,12 @@ static bool __discard_anon_folio_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > > > int ref_count, map_count;
> > > > pmd_t orig_pmd = *pmdp;
> > > >
> > > > - if (folio_test_dirty(folio) || pmd_dirty(orig_pmd))
> > > > + if (pmd_dirty(orig_pmd))
> > > > + folio_set_dirty(folio);
> > > > + if (folio_test_dirty(folio) && !(vma->vm_flags & VM_DROPPABLE)) {
> > > > + folio_set_swapbacked(folio);
> > > > return false;
> > > > + }
> > >
> > > If either the PMD or the folio is dirty, should we just return false right away,
> > > regardless of VM_DROPPABLE? There’s no need to proceed further in that
> > > case, IMHO ;)
> >
> > I don't quite understand you, but we need to proceed to clear pmd entry.
> > if vm_droppable is true, even if the folio is dirty, we still drop the folio.
>
> Hey barry,
>
> One thing I still don’t quite understand is as follows:
>
> One of the semantics of VM_DROPPABLE is that, under memory pressure,
> the kernel can drop the pages. Similarly, for MADV_FREE, one of its
> semantics is that the kernel can free the pages when memory pressure
> occurs, but only if there is no subsequent write (i.e., the PMD is clean).
>
> So, if VM_DROPPABLE is true, we still drop the folio even if it's dirty. This
> seems to conflict with the semantics of MADV_FREE, which requires the
> folio or PMD to be clean before being dropped. wdyt?
I think we can simply revisit the patch where VM_DROPPABLE was introduced:
commit 9651fcedf7b92d3f7
"mm: add MAP_DROPPABLE for designating always lazily freeable mappings"
>
> Thanks,
> Lance
>
>
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Lance
> > >
> > > >
> > > > orig_pmd = pmdp_huge_clear_flush(vma, addr, pmdp);
> > > >
> > > > @@ -3098,8 +3102,15 @@ static bool __discard_anon_folio_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > > > *
> > > > * The only folio refs must be one from isolation plus the rmap(s).
> > > > */
> > > > - if (folio_test_dirty(folio) || pmd_dirty(orig_pmd) ||
> > > > - ref_count != map_count + 1) {
> > > > + if (pmd_dirty(orig_pmd))
> > > > + folio_set_dirty(folio);
> > > > + if (folio_test_dirty(folio) && !(vma->vm_flags & VM_DROPPABLE)) {
> > > > + folio_set_swapbacked(folio);
> > > > + set_pmd_at(mm, addr, pmdp, orig_pmd);
> > > > + return false;
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > + if (ref_count != map_count + 1) {
> > > > set_pmd_at(mm, addr, pmdp, orig_pmd);
> > > > return false;
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -3119,12 +3130,11 @@ bool unmap_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
> > > > {
> > > > VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_pmd_mappable(folio), folio);
> > > > VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_locked(folio), folio);
> > > > + VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_anon(folio), folio);
> > > > + VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_swapbacked(folio), folio);
> > > > VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED(addr, HPAGE_PMD_SIZE));
> > > >
> > > > - if (folio_test_anon(folio) && !folio_test_swapbacked(folio))
> > > > - return __discard_anon_folio_pmd_locked(vma, addr, pmdp, folio);
> > > > -
> > > > - return false;
> > > > + return __discard_anon_folio_pmd_locked(vma, addr, pmdp, folio);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > static void remap_page(struct folio *folio, unsigned long nr, int flags)
> > > > diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
> > > > index be1978d2712d..a859c399ec7c 100644
> > > > --- a/mm/rmap.c
> > > > +++ b/mm/rmap.c
> > > > @@ -1724,9 +1724,16 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > if (!pvmw.pte) {
> > > > - if (unmap_huge_pmd_locked(vma, pvmw.address, pvmw.pmd,
> > > > - folio))
> > > > - goto walk_done;
> > > > + if (folio_test_anon(folio) && !folio_test_swapbacked(folio)) {
> > > > + if (unmap_huge_pmd_locked(vma, pvmw.address, pvmw.pmd, folio))
> > > > + goto walk_done;
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * unmap_huge_pmd_locked has either already marked
> > > > + * the folio as swap-backed or decided to retain it
> > > > + * due to GUP or speculative references.
> > > > + */
> > > > + goto walk_abort;
> > > > + }
> > > >
> > > > if (flags & TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD) {
> > > > /*
> > > > --
> > > > 2.39.3 (Apple Git-146)
> > > >
Thanks
Barry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists