From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Milan Broz <gmazyland@gmail.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Very slow unlockall()
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 19:55:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6eebb858-d517-b70d-9202-f4e84221ed89@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e6f84b27-ed29-0fa4-e466-536b529c5720@gmail.com>
On 2/1/21 7:00 PM, Milan Broz wrote:
> On 01/02/2021 14:08, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 1/8/21 3:39 PM, Milan Broz wrote:
>>> On 08/01/2021 14:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>> On Wed 06-01-21 16:20:15, Milan Broz wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> we use mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE) / munlockall() in cryptsetup code
>>>>> and someone tried to use it with hardened memory allocator library.
>>>>>
>>>>> Execution time was increased to extreme (minutes) and as we found, the problem
>>>>> is in munlockall().
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is a plain reproducer for the core without any external code - it takes
>>>>> unlocking on Fedora rawhide kernel more than 30 seconds!
>>>>> I can reproduce it on 5.10 kernels and Linus' git.
>>>>>
>>>>> The reproducer below tries to mmap large amount memory with PROT_NONE (later never used).
>>>>> The real code of course does something more useful but the problem is the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>>>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>>>> #include <fcntl.h>
>>>>> #include <sys/mman.h>
>>>>>
>>>>> int main (int argc, char *argv[])
>>>>> {
>>>>> void *p = mmap(NULL, 1UL << 41, PROT_NONE, MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
So, this is 2TB memory area, but PROT_NONE means it's never actually populated,
although mlockall(MCL_CURRENT) should do that. Once you put PROT_READ |
PROT_WRITE there, the mlockall() starts taking ages.
So does that reflect your use case? munlockall() with large PROT_NONE areas? If
so, munlock_vma_pages_range() is indeed not optimized for that, but I would
expect such scenario to be uncommon, so better clarify first.
>>>>>
>>>>> if (p == MAP_FAILED) return 1;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE)) return 1;
>>>>> printf("locked\n");
>>>>>
>>>>> if (munlockall()) return 1;
>>>>> printf("unlocked\n");
>>>>>
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>
> ...
>
>>> Today's Linus git - 5.11.0-rc2+ in my testing x86_64 VM (no extensive kernel debug options):
>>>
>>> # time ./lock
>>> locked
>>> unlocked
>>>
>>> real 0m4.172s
>>> user 0m0.000s
>>> sys 0m4.172s
>>
>> The perf report would be more interesting from this configuration.
>
> ok, I cannot run perf on that particular VM but tried the latest Fedora stable
> kernel without debug options - 5.10.12-200.fc33.x86_64
>
> This is the report running reproducer above:
>
> time:
> real 0m6.123s
> user 0m0.099s
> sys 0m5.310s
>
> perf:
>
> # Total Lost Samples: 0
> #
> # Samples: 20K of event 'cycles'
> # Event count (approx.): 20397603279
> #
> # Overhead Command Shared Object Symbol
> # ........ ....... ................. ............................
> #
> 47.26% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] follow_page_mask
> 20.43% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] munlock_vma_pages_range
> 15.92% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] follow_page
> 7.40% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] rcu_all_qs
> 5.87% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _cond_resched
> 3.08% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] follow_huge_addr
> 0.01% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __update_load_avg_cfs_rq
> 0.01% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] ____fput
> 0.01% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] rmap_walk_file
> 0.00% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] page_mapped
> 0.00% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] native_irq_return_iret
> 0.00% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irq
> 0.00% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] perf_iterate_ctx
> 0.00% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] finish_task_switch
> 0.00% perf [kernel.kallsyms] [k] native_sched_clock
> 0.00% lock [kernel.kallsyms] [k] native_write_msr
> 0.00% perf [kernel.kallsyms] [k] native_write_msr
>
>
> m.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-01 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-06 15:20 Very slow unlockall() Milan Broz
2021-01-08 13:41 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-08 14:39 ` Milan Broz
2021-01-31 17:22 ` Milan Broz
2021-02-01 13:08 ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-02-01 18:00 ` Milan Broz
2021-02-01 18:55 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2021-02-01 19:19 ` Milan Broz
2021-02-10 15:18 ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-02-10 16:57 ` Michal Hocko
2021-02-10 17:40 ` Michal Hocko
2021-02-11 5:21 ` Hugh Dickins
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=6eebb858-d517-b70d-9202-f4e84221ed89@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=gmazyland@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).