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=1.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FSL_HELO_FAKE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=no 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 D427FC04AB6 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 12:11:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D77B21473 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 12:11:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1559045460; bh=vfQnV67M4qRA0I69fyNosIJ3n3WnC2AtL7uvdyXSOPQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=l9NPp2uz78wjydjOfW1FtrPvmRjAIZdgd759gUsV7w+l6uDjOHln7qjKzhWN3q7Lf HFoko2I39eK44qinvHCK48AxN1H0+2Ig95H1w3mVpLvXUdG2Fm1Vthx1ZvHQ68rRgB bmHo2j0WJ970qGRz2Sr0+xSJGK3Vyf530gSB6pjM= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726990AbfE1MK7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 May 2019 08:10:59 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f195.google.com ([209.85.210.195]:33682 "EHLO mail-pf1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726620AbfE1MK7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 May 2019 08:10:59 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f195.google.com with SMTP id z28so11371223pfk.0; Tue, 28 May 2019 05:10:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=bLLPV7eUO2o74o8LrbA0JPtEr1nRmqodWfzOijaU7Mk=; b=otVKalXOYK/nl0zCxrG447epNj1oX5gR3f9V+FgwtTx23N8nFnQz5rEfq0ftxjYHVv 7yhZLGKJphQ9eZGVV5INryPO/1cGHk8qRUu4I4W6okNsPJMeYQPQCQyIGdsATqyfWgj+ IyfIvtcwVGkIU9V0SzJcZCI3tdGx90XfN0C0l6QQguyy6FsIs5zGJ3GwjOQ71QbaAR4h IZMO+Vzh2OSfElP2QnOCEsgHGiq0ht6fcuUk+23bwdpUMQYO5VW60f63cTXbmNna7X9i qnVeQkvm6g2+ZSsxMXWHTUnmNuYMWtfeYpTDz2zk212eHa0pevdsLlnDFCFE/s5m93mo VU7A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=bLLPV7eUO2o74o8LrbA0JPtEr1nRmqodWfzOijaU7Mk=; b=rVwenooX581L7VGg4ggMh2Vf9MFLvz37yZ/Xas0+oDWKVYemBIbadYkmfSvZZB/A4L GFOCy2XVj/NKUQXkc+o3cLuZEs0SMYeqhqd7iaDAlL7YAfpYW4nR/fme6ixma3Gv33+g tH5KeqlF3xsIJrK/CqGjLUm+KkWXx4YSS/s/odC+FpJ3xI251Vk0ri/xo6j2dT8m6vh+ rx/S3KUeBQDG7vAVfEBSVacJVpmMeMtvQ297EW/2SfLlgXgvE1J6oyrlKuXhfkobqamx FP/yh3nelAVYRYKf9C+It2d7vVctnygd8YixUjE7v4MxbKFjxIUPI/NI3eXn9NugZBBu yiQA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUcX4cH1J1wJoOUwmeXtjPdEdXwy4rWk1IiV2SsO1cWIaEzW+es rjduDFFUjJTSYpYycw/j6fE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzZu2DckSAfm6b7/skht70dageJqYdxnd3tnitDqNQYstXd5I6Z9o69tRtnlF0c9Z9C+Sqe0g== X-Received: by 2002:a63:4104:: with SMTP id o4mr13313731pga.345.1559045458612; Tue, 28 May 2019 05:10:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2401:fa00:d:0:98f1:8b3d:1f37:3e8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b18sm23588605pfp.32.2019.05.28.05.10.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 28 May 2019 05:10:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 21:10:51 +0900 From: Minchan Kim To: Daniel Colascione Cc: Michal Hocko , Andrew Morton , LKML , linux-mm , Johannes Weiner , Tim Murray , Joel Fernandes , Suren Baghdasaryan , Shakeel Butt , Sonny Rao , Brian Geffon , Linux API Subject: Re: [RFC 7/7] mm: madvise support MADV_ANONYMOUS_FILTER and MADV_FILE_FILTER Message-ID: <20190528121051.GC30365@google.com> References: <20190528062947.GL1658@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190528081351.GA159710@google.com> <20190528084927.GB159710@google.com> <20190528090821.GU1658@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190528103256.GA9199@google.com> <20190528104117.GW1658@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190528111208.GA30365@google.com> <20190528112840.GY1658@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 04:42:47AM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 4:28 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Tue 28-05-19 20:12:08, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:41:17PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Tue 28-05-19 19:32:56, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:08:21AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > On Tue 28-05-19 17:49:27, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 01:31:13AM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 1:14 AM Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > > > > > > if we went with the per vma fd approach then you would get this > > > > > > > > > > feature automatically because map_files would refer to file backed > > > > > > > > > > mappings while map_anon could refer only to anonymous mappings. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reason to add such filter option is to avoid the parsing overhead > > > > > > > > > so map_anon wouldn't be helpful. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without chiming on whether the filter option is a good idea, I'd like > > > > > > > > to suggest that providing an efficient binary interfaces for pulling > > > > > > > > memory map information out of processes. Some single-system-call > > > > > > > > method for retrieving a binary snapshot of a process's address space > > > > > > > > complete with attributes (selectable, like statx?) for each VMA would > > > > > > > > reduce complexity and increase performance in a variety of areas, > > > > > > > > e.g., Android memory map debugging commands. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree it's the best we can get *generally*. > > > > > > > Michal, any opinion? > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not really sure this is directly related. I think the primary > > > > > > question that we have to sort out first is whether we want to have > > > > > > the remote madvise call process or vma fd based. This is an important > > > > > > distinction wrt. usability. I have only seen pid vs. pidfd discussions > > > > > > so far unfortunately. > > > > > > > > > > With current usecase, it's per-process API with distinguishable anon/file > > > > > but thought it could be easily extended later for each address range > > > > > operation as userspace getting smarter with more information. > > > > > > > > Never design user API based on a single usecase, please. The "easily > > > > extended" part is by far not clear to me TBH. As I've already mentioned > > > > several times, the synchronization model has to be thought through > > > > carefuly before a remote process address range operation can be > > > > implemented. > > > > > > I agree with you that we shouldn't design API on single usecase but what > > > you are concerning is actually not our usecase because we are resilient > > > with the race since MADV_COLD|PAGEOUT is not destruptive. > > > Actually, many hints are already racy in that the upcoming pattern would > > > be different with the behavior you thought at the moment. > > > > How come they are racy wrt address ranges? You would have to be in > > multithreaded environment and then the onus of synchronization is on > > threads. That model is quite clear. But we are talking about separate > > processes and some of them might be even not aware of an external entity > > tweaking their address space. > > I don't think the difference between a thread and a process matters in > this context. Threads race on address space operations all the time > --- in the sense that multiple threads modify a process's address > space without synchronization. The main reasons that these races > hasn't been a problem are: 1) threads mostly "mind their own business" > and modify different parts of the address space or use locks to ensure > that they don't stop on each other (e.g., the malloc heap lock), and > 2) POSIX mmap atomic-replacement semantics make certain classes of > operation (like "magic ring buffer" setup) safe even in the presence > of other threads stomping over an address space. > > The thing that's new in this discussion from a synchronization point > of view isn't that the VM operation we're talking about is coming from > outside the process, but that we want to do a read-decide-modify-ish > thing. We want to affect (using various hints) classes of pages like > "all file pages" or "all anonymous pages" or "some pages referring to > graphics buffers up to 100MB" (to pick an example off the top of my > head of a policy that might make sense). From a synchronization point > of view, it doesn't really matter whether it's a thread within the > target process or a thread outside the target process that does the > address space manipulation. What's new is the inspection of the > address space before performing an operation. > > Minchan started this thread by proposing some flags that would > implement a few of the filtering policies I used as examples above. > Personally, instead of providing a few pre-built policies as flags, > I'd rather push the page manipulation policy to userspace as much as > possible and just have the kernel provide a mechanism that *in > general* makes these read-decide-modify operations efficient and > robust. I still think there's way to achieve this goal very > inexpensively without compromising on flexibility. I'm looking forward to seeing the way. ;-)