linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3] mm: compaction: skip memory compaction when there are not enough migratable 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0347ff02-eac4-4fa5-88c3-6d12988438d1@126.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:17:50 +0800
From: Ge Yang <yangge1116@....com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 21cnbao@...il.com,
 david@...hat.com, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
 liuzixing@...on.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] mm: compaction: skip memory compaction when there are
 not enough migratable pages



在 2025/1/14 20:51, Vlastimil Babka 写道:
> On 1/14/25 13:24, Ge Yang wrote:
>>> Hopefully also when done from the pin_user_pages_remote(..., FOLL_LONGTERM,
>>> ...) context the allocation gfp_mask correctly lacks __GFP_MOVABLE?
>> yes.
>> I guess
>>> it has to, otherwise it would allocate from the CMA pageblocks.
>>>
>>> Then I wonder if we could use the real allocation context to determine
>>> watermarks, as __compaction_suitable() is passing ALLOC_CMA instead because
>>> it's checking only for migration targets, which have to be CMA compatible by
>>> definition. But we could use the real unmovable allocation context to have
>>> __zone_watermark_unusable_free() subtract CMA pages, and thus we won't pass
>>> the order-0 check anymore once the non-CMA part is exhausted.
>>>
>>> There's some risk that in some different scenario the compaction could in
>>> fact migrate pages from the exhausted non-CMA part of the zone to the CMA
>>> part and succeed, and we'll skip it instead. But that should be rare?
>>>
>> Below is the previous discussion：
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1734436004-1212-1-git-send-email-yangge1116@126.com/
> 
> Right so Johannes had the same concern.
> 
>>> Anyway given that concern I'm not sure about changing
>>> __compaction_suitable() for every caller like this. We could (at least
>>> initially) target this heuristic only for COMPACT_PRIO_ASYNC which is being
>>> used for this THP opportunistic attempt.
>>>
>>> So for example:
>>> - add a new bool flag to compact_control that is true for COMPACT_PRIO_ASYNC
>>> - pass cc pointer to compaction_suit_allocation_order()
>>> - in that function, add another check if the the new cc flag is true,
>>> between the current zone_watermark_ok() and compaction_suitable() checks,
>>> which works like __compaction_suitable() but uses alloc_flags (which should
>>> not be ALLOC_CMA in our pinned allocation case) instead of ALLOC_CMA, return
>>> COMPACT_SKIPPED if it fails.
>>>
>> I will send a new version of the patch based on the suggestions here.
>> Thank you.
> 
> Yeah that way should hopefully limit the concern sufficiently. Maybe we
> could also add costly_order condition in addition to COMPACT_PRIO_ASYNC
> condition to set the new compact_control flag. But only __GFP_NORETRY
> allocations should be affected in the immediate "goto nopage" when
> compaction is skipped, others will attempt with DEF_COMPACT_PRIORITY anyway
> and won't fail without trying to compact-migrate the non-CMA pageblocks into
> CMA pageblocks first, so it should be fine.
Ok, thanks.