linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm: skip mlocked THPs that are underused early in deferred_split

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: <7pmksyuurzi2df5r7d2lpku63rbimjy5e3dzmleb63ik4257ge@2sm7yqfqvolf>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 13:45:03 +0100
From: Kiryl Shutsemau <kirill@...temov.name>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, 
	Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, baohua@...nel.org, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, 
	dev.jain@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, npache@...hat.com, ryan.roberts@....com, usamaarif642@...il.com, 
	ziy@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm: skip mlocked THPs that are underused early in
 deferred_split_scan()

On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 02:04:05PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 08.09.25 13:44, Kiryl Shutsemau wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 01:32:05PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > On 08.09.25 12:38, Kiryl Shutsemau wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 05:07:41PM +0800, Lance Yang wrote:
> > > > > From: Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>
> > > > > 
> > > > > When we stumble over a fully-mapped mlocked THP in the deferred shrinker,
> > > > > it does not make sense to try to detect whether it is underused, because
> > > > > try_to_map_unused_to_zeropage(), called while splitting the folio, will not
> > > > > actually replace any zeroed pages by the shared zeropage.
> > > > 
> > > > It makes me think, does KSM follows the same logic as
> > > > try_to_map_unused_to_zeropage()?
> > > > 
> > > > I cannot immediately find what prevents KSM from replacing zeroed mlocked
> > > > folio with ZERO_PAGE().
> > > > 
> > > > Hm?
> > > 
> > > I assume if you're using mlock and at the same time enable KSM for a
> > > process/VMA, you're doing something wrong.
> > > 
> > > In contrast, THP is supposed to be transparent (yeah, I know ...).
> > 
> > Yeah, I guess it is user error.
> > 
> > Maybe we should make ksm_compatible() return false for VM_LOCKED?
> > KSM breaks mlock() contract.
> 
> I was thinking the same and falsely remembered that we would already be
> checking for that.
> 
> > 
> > But it can be risky if someone already relies on this broken behaviour.
> 
> Could be.
> 
> Staring at QEMU, we have the following parameters:
> 
> 	mem-merge=on|off
> 
>     	Enables or disables memory merge support. This feature, when 	
>         supported by the host, de-duplicates identical memory pages
>         among VMs instances (enabled by default).
> 
> And
> 
> 	-overcommit mem-lock=on|off|on-fault
> 
> 	"Run qemu with hints about host resource overcommit. The default
> 	 is to assume that host overcommits all resources."
> 
> 
> Now, I would assume that anybody who sets "-overcommit mem-lock=on" either
> 
> (a) Has KSM disabled on that machine.
> 
> (b) Sets mem-merge=off
> 
> as well. But QEMU would allow for configuring it.

ksm_madvise(MADV_MERGEABLE) succeeds on !vma_ksm_compatible(), so it
wouldn't be functional breakage, but may result in unexpected increase
of memory consumption.

> Interestingly, mm_populate()->populate_vma_page_range() wants to break COW.
> [*]
> 
> But if the app later calls fork(), we still allow for cow-sharing pages with
> the child. (another case of "don't do it", like KSM I guess)

CoW has bunch of these "don't do it". :P

> [*] it doesn't do it for mappings that start out R/O. I think we might end
> up with sharedzero pages in that case, but not sure if worth fixing.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers
> 
> David / dhildenb
> 

-- 
  Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov