Linux-api Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Tim Murray <timmurray@google.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
	Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@google.com>,
	Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>,
	Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 6/7] mm: extend process_madvise syscall to support vector arrary
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 08:57:55 +0200
Message-ID: <20190530065755.GD6703@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190530021748.GE229459@google.com>

On Thu 30-05-19 11:17:48, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 12:33:52PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 29-05-19 03:08:32, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 12:49 AM Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 12:37:26PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > > On Tue 21-05-19 19:26:13, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 08:24:21AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue 21-05-19 11:48:20, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 11:22:58AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > > > > > > [Cc linux-api]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon 20-05-19 12:52:53, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Currently, process_madvise syscall works for only one address range
> > > > > > > > > > so user should call the syscall several times to give hints to
> > > > > > > > > > multiple address range.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Is that a problem? How big of a problem? Any numbers?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We easily have 2000+ vma so it's not trivial overhead. I will come up
> > > > > > > > with number in the description at respin.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does this really have to be a fast operation? I would expect the monitor
> > > > > > > is by no means a fast path. The system call overhead is not what it used
> > > > > > > to be, sigh, but still for something that is not a hot path it should be
> > > > > > > tolerable, especially when the whole operation is quite expensive on its
> > > > > > > own (wrt. the syscall entry/exit).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What's different with process_vm_[readv|writev] and vmsplice?
> > > > > > If the range needed to be covered is a lot, vector operation makes senese
> > > > > > to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not saying that the vector API is wrong. All I am trying to say is
> > > > > that the benefit is not really clear so far. If you want to push it
> > > > > through then you should better get some supporting data.
> > > >
> > > > I measured 1000 madvise syscall vs. a vector range syscall with 1000
> > > > ranges on ARM64 mordern device. Even though I saw 15% improvement but
> > > > absoluate gain is just 1ms so I don't think it's worth to support.
> > > > I will drop vector support at next revision.
> > > 
> > > Please do keep the vector support. Absolute timing is misleading,
> > > since in a tight loop, you're not going to contend on mmap_sem. We've
> > > seen tons of improvements in things like camera start come from
> > > coalescing mprotect calls, with the gains coming from taking and
> > > releasing various locks a lot less often and bouncing around less on
> > > the contended lock paths. Raw throughput doesn't tell the whole story,
> > > especially on mobile.
> > 
> > This will always be a double edge sword. Taking a lock for longer can
> > improve a throughput of a single call but it would make a latency for
> > anybody contending on the lock much worse.
> > 
> > Besides that, please do not overcomplicate the thing from the early
> > beginning please. Let's start with a simple and well defined remote
> > madvise alternative first and build a vector API on top with some
> > numbers based on _real_ workloads.
> 
> First time, I didn't think about atomicity about address range race
> because MADV_COLD/PAGEOUT is not critical for the race.
> However you raised the atomicity issue because people would extend
> hints to destructive ones easily. I agree with that and that's why
> we discussed how to guarantee the race and Daniel comes up with good idea.

Just for the clarification, I didn't really mean atomicity but rather a
_consistency_ (essentially time to check to time to use consistency).
 
>   - vma configuration seq number via process_getinfo(2).
> 
> We discussed the race issue without _read_ workloads/requests because
> it's common sense that people might extend the syscall later.
> 
> Here is same. For current workload, we don't need to support vector
> for perfomance point of view based on my experiment. However, it's
> rather limited experiment. Some configuration might have 10000+ vmas
> or really slow CPU. 
> 
> Furthermore, I want to have vector support due to atomicity issue
> if it's really the one we should consider.
> With vector support of the API and vma configuration sequence number
> from Daniel, we could support address ranges operations's atomicity.

I am not sure what do you mean here. Perform all ranges atomicaly wrt.
other address space modifications? If yes I am not sure we want that
semantic because it can cause really long stalls for other operations
but that is a discussion on its own and I would rather focus on a simple
interface first.

> However, since we don't introduce vector at this moment, we need to
> introduce *another syscall* later to be able to handle multile ranges
> all at once atomically if it's okay.

Agreed.

> Other thought:
> Maybe we could extend address range batch syscall covers other MM
> syscall like mmap/munmap/madvise/mprotect and so on because there
> are multiple users that would benefit from this general batching
> mechanism.

Again a discussion on its own ;)

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply index

Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20190520035254.57579-1-minchan@kernel.org>
     [not found] ` <20190520035254.57579-2-minchan@kernel.org>
2019-05-20  8:16   ` [RFC 1/7] mm: introduce MADV_COOL Michal Hocko
2019-05-20  8:19     ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-20 15:08       ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2019-05-20 22:55       ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-20 22:54     ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-21  6:04       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-21  9:11         ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-21 10:05           ` Michal Hocko
     [not found] ` <20190520035254.57579-4-minchan@kernel.org>
2019-05-20  8:27   ` [RFC 3/7] mm: introduce MADV_COLD Michal Hocko
2019-05-20 23:00     ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-21  6:08       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-21  9:13         ` Minchan Kim
     [not found] ` <20190520035254.57579-6-minchan@kernel.org>
2019-05-20  9:18   ` [RFC 5/7] mm: introduce external memory hinting API Michal Hocko
2019-05-21  2:41     ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-21  6:17       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-21 10:32         ` Minchan Kim
     [not found] ` <20190520035254.57579-7-minchan@kernel.org>
2019-05-20  9:22   ` [RFC 6/7] mm: extend process_madvise syscall to support vector arrary Michal Hocko
2019-05-21  2:48     ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-21  6:24       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-21 10:26         ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-21 10:37           ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27  7:49             ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-29 10:08               ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-29 10:33                 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-30  2:17                   ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-30  6:57                     ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2019-05-30  8:02                       ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-30 16:19                         ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-30 18:47                         ` Michal Hocko
     [not found] ` <20190520035254.57579-8-minchan@kernel.org>
2019-05-20  9:28   ` [RFC 7/7] mm: madvise support MADV_ANONYMOUS_FILTER and MADV_FILE_FILTER Michal Hocko
2019-05-21  2:55     ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-21  6:26       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27  7:58         ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-27 12:44           ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28  3:26             ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-28  6:29               ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28  8:13                 ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-28  8:31                   ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-28  8:49                     ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-28  9:08                       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28  9:39                         ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-28 10:33                           ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 11:21                             ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-28 11:49                               ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 12:11                                 ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-28 12:32                                   ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 10:32                         ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-28 10:41                           ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 11:12                             ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-28 11:28                               ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 11:42                                 ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-28 11:56                                   ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 12:18                                     ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-28 12:38                                       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 12:10                                   ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-28 11:44                                 ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-28 11:51                                   ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-28 12:06                                   ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-28 12:22                                     ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-28 11:28                             ` Daniel Colascione
2019-05-21 15:33       ` Johannes Weiner
2019-05-22  1:50         ` Minchan Kim
2019-05-20  9:28 ` [RFC 0/7] introduce memory hinting API for external process Michal Hocko
     [not found] ` <20190520164605.GA11665@cmpxchg.org>
     [not found]   ` <20190521043950.GJ10039@google.com>
2019-05-21  6:32     ` Michal Hocko
     [not found] ` <20190521014452.GA6738@bombadil.infradead.org>
2019-05-21  6:34   ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-21 12:53 ` Shakeel Butt
     [not found] ` <dbe801f0-4bbe-5f6e-9053-4b7deb38e235@arm.com>
     [not found]   ` <CAEe=Sxka3Q3vX+7aWUJGKicM+a9Px0rrusyL+5bB1w4ywF6N4Q@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]     ` <1754d0ef-6756-d88b-f728-17b1fe5d5b07@arm.com>
2019-05-21 12:56       ` Shakeel Butt
2019-05-22  4:23         ` Brian Geffon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190530065755.GD6703@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bgeffon@google.com \
    --cc=dancol@google.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=sonnyrao@google.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=timmurray@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-api Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-api/0 linux-api/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-api linux-api/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-api \
		linux-api@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-api

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-api


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git