From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2AF0C282DD for ; Wed, 22 May 2019 14:52:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B33AA20879 for ; Wed, 22 May 2019 14:52:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=brauner.io header.i=@brauner.io header.b="U5XfVnBm" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729704AbfEVOwZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2019 10:52:25 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com ([209.85.128.66]:52353 "EHLO mail-wm1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728450AbfEVOwY (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2019 10:52:24 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f66.google.com with SMTP id y3so2556565wmm.2 for ; Wed, 22 May 2019 07:52:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=brauner.io; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=3DnnIUojWaR5YIA9yH08ChhAbPSeJyxJCDjrmsDfSsA=; b=U5XfVnBmGagx0TH5T0dG1OqPauKyU5SKMZ0ZCqzNJVWYAOE2xwZX1eOtsD/mE39TZ4 y8LZldnII9DDg8vB4aM0k/zdTCrCrDOxon3Kwa/J5see9x1FkqPzjM24DintCwCthbN7 bZyxhiq93dym4w/djrwc9lbHYeN2pgd33TmXmnjjNIVla7rSQekCDM26dwNrGD8aSfe9 IfH8YO4PvSr3zglxjNZaOt7MTAtpT/gFGnUzlo5w9Mt8DXmGTKumgfZGENhLID52tBTE Tvxa3Vuh+33sHwUExR+xszjMWJbWL+F0uQoJsN0xlxER+b/wPMX1i9mZ9Tj1PhMoUTxR 4v+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=3DnnIUojWaR5YIA9yH08ChhAbPSeJyxJCDjrmsDfSsA=; b=THPtEBK3UOOiT7HOpNXL6Pp0DsvlvRWlWrfQce9NDdIyOfd+Pa8OgtNOFWJRxDzRyi rch4hmUx6mV9Fs3eZ+HudMyE+S0cd/9UHjKTgWKg/uGel6baYzonKjf7gZYIS9U5uDJZ nIz+ieL/HrLNZ0uSyIuIijfLpTIkDpxEI+DFGrQ4jFV86iqek1NTajwq6q7EYWLHwbst yiYr89zvYhLetJ+xkUOWYyYEOXrcq0I4djIg6Qd+fTvRZv87OEM7+t8mCs8qBOq5AEJG zMYATbSxHLpmKieG7gQsVEIAwvITaeHgI+wv/TfQ6axjhTqXhCO9lpvv1mCBshcPjNYg CnCw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVnEB8Ym0wgv/kvICN/i1kjzxByfxgtoUuislbAaWsNCHD82IL0 wV5Q36Ei1TUjDRmffksgRvqORw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxe/48zJHcWQd1hbtgV5hwv5K4QMSu47Dx8duCnDwXSuhmOK/vOE163vDGsj42L8A/JRSS5kw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:6c1a:: with SMTP id h26mr7609241wmc.89.1558536741141; Wed, 22 May 2019 07:52:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brauner.io ([185.197.132.10]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t19sm5255055wmi.42.2019.05.22.07.52.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 May 2019 07:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 16:52:18 +0200 From: Christian Brauner To: Daniel Colascione Cc: Minchan Kim , Andrew Morton , LKML , linux-mm , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Tim Murray , Joel Fernandes , Suren Baghdasaryan , Shakeel Butt , Sonny Rao , Brian Geffon , Jann Horn Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] introduce memory hinting API for external process Message-ID: <20190522145216.jkimuudoxi6pder2@brauner.io> References: <20190520035254.57579-1-minchan@kernel.org> <20190521084158.s5wwjgewexjzrsm6@brauner.io> <20190521110552.GG219653@google.com> <20190521113029.76iopljdicymghvq@brauner.io> <20190521113911.2rypoh7uniuri2bj@brauner.io> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 06:16:35AM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 1:22 AM Christian Brauner wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 7:12 AM Daniel Colascione wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 4:39 AM Christian Brauner wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 01:30:29PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 08:05:52PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 10:42:00AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 12:52:47PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > > > > > - Background > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Android terminology used for forking a new process and starting an app > > > > > > > > from scratch is a cold start, while resuming an existing app is a hot start. > > > > > > > > While we continually try to improve the performance of cold starts, hot > > > > > > > > starts will always be significantly less power hungry as well as faster so > > > > > > > > we are trying to make hot start more likely than cold start. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To increase hot start, Android userspace manages the order that apps should > > > > > > > > be killed in a process called ActivityManagerService. ActivityManagerService > > > > > > > > tracks every Android app or service that the user could be interacting with > > > > > > > > at any time and translates that into a ranked list for lmkd(low memory > > > > > > > > killer daemon). They are likely to be killed by lmkd if the system has to > > > > > > > > reclaim memory. In that sense they are similar to entries in any other cache. > > > > > > > > Those apps are kept alive for opportunistic performance improvements but > > > > > > > > those performance improvements will vary based on the memory requirements of > > > > > > > > individual workloads. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Problem > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Naturally, cached apps were dominant consumers of memory on the system. > > > > > > > > However, they were not significant consumers of swap even though they are > > > > > > > > good candidate for swap. Under investigation, swapping out only begins > > > > > > > > once the low zone watermark is hit and kswapd wakes up, but the overall > > > > > > > > allocation rate in the system might trip lmkd thresholds and cause a cached > > > > > > > > process to be killed(we measured performance swapping out vs. zapping the > > > > > > > > memory by killing a process. Unsurprisingly, zapping is 10x times faster > > > > > > > > even though we use zram which is much faster than real storage) so kill > > > > > > > > from lmkd will often satisfy the high zone watermark, resulting in very > > > > > > > > few pages actually being moved to swap. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Approach > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The approach we chose was to use a new interface to allow userspace to > > > > > > > > proactively reclaim entire processes by leveraging platform information. > > > > > > > > This allowed us to bypass the inaccuracy of the kernel’s LRUs for pages > > > > > > > > that are known to be cold from userspace and to avoid races with lmkd > > > > > > > > by reclaiming apps as soon as they entered the cached state. Additionally, > > > > > > > > it could provide many chances for platform to use much information to > > > > > > > > optimize memory efficiency. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMHO we should spell it out that this patchset complements MADV_WONTNEED > > > > > > > > and MADV_FREE by adding non-destructive ways to gain some free memory > > > > > > > > space. MADV_COLD is similar to MADV_WONTNEED in a way that it hints the > > > > > > > > kernel that memory region is not currently needed and should be reclaimed > > > > > > > > immediately; MADV_COOL is similar to MADV_FREE in a way that it hints the > > > > > > > > kernel that memory region is not currently needed and should be reclaimed > > > > > > > > when memory pressure rises. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To achieve the goal, the patchset introduce two new options for madvise. > > > > > > > > One is MADV_COOL which will deactive activated pages and the other is > > > > > > > > MADV_COLD which will reclaim private pages instantly. These new options > > > > > > > > complement MADV_DONTNEED and MADV_FREE by adding non-destructive ways to > > > > > > > > gain some free memory space. MADV_COLD is similar to MADV_DONTNEED in a way > > > > > > > > that it hints the kernel that memory region is not currently needed and > > > > > > > > should be reclaimed immediately; MADV_COOL is similar to MADV_FREE in a way > > > > > > > > that it hints the kernel that memory region is not currently needed and > > > > > > > > should be reclaimed when memory pressure rises. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This approach is similar in spirit to madvise(MADV_WONTNEED), but the > > > > > > > > information required to make the reclaim decision is not known to the app. > > > > > > > > Instead, it is known to a centralized userspace daemon, and that daemon > > > > > > > > must be able to initiate reclaim on its own without any app involvement. > > > > > > > > To solve the concern, this patch introduces new syscall - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > struct pr_madvise_param { > > > > > > > > int size; > > > > > > > > const struct iovec *vec; > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > int process_madvise(int pidfd, ssize_t nr_elem, int *behavior, > > > > > > > > struct pr_madvise_param *restuls, > > > > > > > > struct pr_madvise_param *ranges, > > > > > > > > unsigned long flags); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The syscall get pidfd to give hints to external process and provides > > > > > > > > pair of result/ranges vector arguments so that it could give several > > > > > > > > hints to each address range all at once. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess others have different ideas about the naming of syscall and options > > > > > > > > so feel free to suggest better naming. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, all new syscalls making use of pidfds should be named > > > > > > > pidfd_. So please make this pidfd_madvise. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't have any particular preference but just wondering why pidfd is > > > > > > so special to have it as prefix of system call name. > > > > > > > > > > It's a whole new API to address processes. We already have > > > > > clone(CLONE_PIDFD) and pidfd_send_signal() as you have seen since you > > > > > exported pidfd_to_pid(). And we're going to have pidfd_open(). Your > > > > > syscall works only with pidfds so it's tied to this api as well so it > > > > > should follow the naming scheme. This also makes life easier for > > > > > userspace and is consistent. > > > > > > > > This is at least my reasoning. I'm not going to make this a whole big > > > > pedantic argument. If people have really strong feelings about not using > > > > this prefix then fine. But if syscalls can be grouped together and have > > > > consistent naming this is always a big plus. > > > > > > My hope has been that pidfd use becomes normalized enough that > > > prefixing "pidfd_" to pidfd-accepting system calls becomes redundant. > > > We write write(), not fd_write(), right? :-) pidfd_open() makes sense > > > because the primary purpose of this system call is to operate on a > > > pidfd, but I think process_madvise() is fine. > > > > This madvise syscall just operates on pidfds. It would make sense to > > name it process_madvise() if were to operate both on pid_t and int pidfd. > > The name of the function ought to encode its purpose, not its > signature. The system call under discussion operates on processes and > so should be called "process_madvise". That this system call happens > to accept a pidfd to identify the process on which it operates is not > its most interesting aspect of the system call. The argument type > isn't important enough to spotlight in the permanent name of an API. > Pidfds are novel now, but they won't be novel in the future. I'm not going to go into yet another long argument. I prefer pidfd_*. It's tied to the api, transparent for userspace, and disambiguates it from process_vm_{read,write}v that both take a pid_t.