linux-kernel - Re: Report: Performance regression from ib_umem

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: <20250423232828.GV1213339@ziepe.ca>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 20:28:28 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: jane.chu@...cle.com
Cc: logane@...tatee.com, hch@....de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	willy@...radead.org, kch@...dia.com, axboe@...nel.dk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Report: Performance regression from ib_umem_get on zone device
 pages

On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 12:21:15PM -0700, jane.chu@...cle.com wrote:

> So this looks like a case of CPU cache thrashing, but I don't know to fix
> it. Could someone help address the issue?  I'd be happy to help verifying.

I don't know that we can even really fix it if that is the cause.. But
it seems suspect, if you are only doing 2M at a time per CPU core then
that is only 512 struct pages or 32k of data. The GUP process will
have touched all of that if device-dax is not creating folios. So why
did it fall out of the cache?

If it is creating folios then maybe we can improve things by
recovering the folios before adding the pages.

Or is something weird going on like the device-dax is using 1G folios
and all of these pins and checks are sharing and bouncing the same
struct page cache lines?

Can the device-dax implement memfd_pin_folios()?

> The flow of a single test run:
>   1. reserve virtual address space for (61440 * 2MB) via mmap with PROT_NONE
> and MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_NORESERVE| MAP_PRIVATE
>   2. mmap ((61440 * 2MB) / 12) from each of the 12 device-dax to the
> reserved virtual address space sequentially to form a continual VA
> space

Like is there any chance that each of these 61440 VMA's is a single
2MB folio from device-dax, or could it be?

IIRC device-dax does could not use folios until 6.15 so I'm assuming
it is not folios even if it is a pmd mapping?

Jason