linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v3 3/8] slab: add sheaf support for batching kfree

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: <Z_XScomDqU_Dke17@harry>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2025 10:50:42 +0900
From: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
        Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
        maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 3/8] slab: add sheaf support for batching
 kfree_rcu() operations

On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 03:33:04PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> Extend the sheaf infrastructure for more efficient kfree_rcu() handling.
> For caches with sheaves, on each cpu maintain a rcu_free sheaf in
> addition to main and spare sheaves.
> 
> kfree_rcu() operations will try to put objects on this sheaf. Once full,
> the sheaf is detached and submitted to call_rcu() with a handler that
> will try to put it in the barn, or flush to slab pages using bulk free,
> when the barn is full. Then a new empty sheaf must be obtained to put
> more objects there.
> 
> It's possible that no free sheaves are available to use for a new
> rcu_free sheaf, and the allocation in kfree_rcu() context can only use
> GFP_NOWAIT and thus may fail. In that case, fall back to the existing
> kfree_rcu() machinery.
> 
> Expected advantages:
> - batching the kfree_rcu() operations, that could eventually replace the
>   existing batching
> - sheaves can be reused for allocations via barn instead of being
>   flushed to slabs, which is more efficient
>   - this includes cases where only some cpus are allowed to process rcu
>     callbacks (Android)
> 
> Possible disadvantage:
> - objects might be waiting for more than their grace period (it is
>   determined by the last object freed into the sheaf), increasing memory
>   usage - but the existing batching does that too?
> 
> Only implement this for CONFIG_KVFREE_RCU_BATCHED as the tiny
> implementation favors smaller memory footprint over performance.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
> Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> ---
>  mm/slab.h        |   2 +
>  mm/slab_common.c |  24 ++++++++
>  mm/slub.c        | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  3 files changed, 189 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/slab.h b/mm/slab.h
> index 8daaec53b6ecfc44171191d421adb12e5cba2c58..94e9959e1aefa350d3d74e3f5309fde7a5cf2ec8 100644
> --- a/mm/slab.h
> +++ b/mm/slab.h
> @@ -459,6 +459,8 @@ static inline bool is_kmalloc_normal(struct kmem_cache *s)
>  	return !(s->flags & (SLAB_CACHE_DMA|SLAB_ACCOUNT|SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT));
>  }
>  
> +bool __kfree_rcu_sheaf(struct kmem_cache *s, void *obj);
> +
>  /* Legal flag mask for kmem_cache_create(), for various configurations */
>  #define SLAB_CORE_FLAGS (SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN | SLAB_CACHE_DMA | \
>  			 SLAB_CACHE_DMA32 | SLAB_PANIC | \
> diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
> index ceeefb287899a82f30ad79b403556001c1860311..9496176770ed47491e01ed78e060a74771d5541e 100644
> --- a/mm/slab_common.c
> +++ b/mm/slab_common.c
> @@ -1957,6 +1978,9 @@ void kvfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, void *ptr)
>  	if (!head)
>  		might_sleep();
>  
> +	if (kfree_rcu_sheaf(ptr))
> +		return;
> +
>  	// Queue the object but don't yet schedule the batch.
>  	if (debug_rcu_head_queue(ptr)) {
>  		// Probable double kfree_rcu(), just leak.
> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
> index fa3a6329713a9f45b189f27d4b1b334b54589c38..83f4395267dccfbc144920baa7d0a85a27fbb1b4 100644
> --- a/mm/slub.c
> +++ b/mm/slub.c
> @@ -350,6 +350,8 @@ enum stat_item {
>  	ALLOC_FASTPATH,		/* Allocation from cpu slab */
>  	ALLOC_SLOWPATH,		/* Allocation by getting a new cpu slab */
>  	FREE_PCS,		/* Free to percpu sheaf */
> +	FREE_RCU_SHEAF,		/* Free to rcu_free sheaf */
> +	FREE_RCU_SHEAF_FAIL,	/* Failed to free to a rcu_free sheaf */
>  	FREE_FASTPATH,		/* Free to cpu slab */
>  	FREE_SLOWPATH,		/* Freeing not to cpu slab */
>  	FREE_FROZEN,		/* Freeing to frozen slab */
> @@ -442,6 +444,7 @@ struct slab_sheaf {
>  		struct rcu_head rcu_head;
>  		struct list_head barn_list;
>  	};
> +	struct kmem_cache *cache;
>  	unsigned int size;
>  	void *objects[];
>  };
> @@ -450,6 +453,7 @@ struct slub_percpu_sheaves {
>  	localtry_lock_t lock;
>  	struct slab_sheaf *main; /* never NULL when unlocked */
>  	struct slab_sheaf *spare; /* empty or full, may be NULL */
> +	struct slab_sheaf *rcu_free; /* for batching kfree_rcu() */
>  	struct node_barn *barn;
>  };
>  
> @@ -2597,7 +2621,7 @@ static void sheaf_flush_unused(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab_sheaf *sheaf)
>  static void pcs_flush_all(struct kmem_cache *s)
>  {
>  	struct slub_percpu_sheaves *pcs;
> -	struct slab_sheaf *spare;
> +	struct slab_sheaf *spare, *rcu_free;
>  
>  	localtry_lock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock);
>  	pcs = this_cpu_ptr(s->cpu_sheaves);
> @@ -2605,6 +2629,9 @@ static void pcs_flush_all(struct kmem_cache *s)
>  	spare = pcs->spare;
>  	pcs->spare = NULL;
>  
> +	rcu_free = pcs->rcu_free;
> +	pcs->rcu_free = NULL;
> +
>  	localtry_unlock(&s->cpu_sheaves->lock);

Hmm this hunk in v3 is fine, but on your slub-percpu-shaves-v4r0 branch
it's calling local_unlock() twice. Probably a rebase error?

Otherwise looks good to me.

When you address this, please feel free to add:

Reviewed-by: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>

Thanks!

-- 
Cheers,
Harry / Hyeonggon