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 4E299C04AB6 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 12:22:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FBF52133F for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 12:22:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1559046137; bh=qCX9hz5NxRIaCycMO6g8nTX7jEjW5BiXV67oOxCTG6s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=sueK1uBCsqv45eoU6s6llEgQoa6JSeaOuU7EmTnmL3hK+ovUtClO+vKCNSDdcHonW 4p2XzM3TWvYJ2dJ2XJBacooPK2e1BEMslv0B7FF4PuPxR5wvuWhzcD03sZZ8n/3/HV YrzbCQLXKWUHoy0mka5ogPPvAEekO6/lW5PbDwyM= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726950AbfE1MWQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 May 2019 08:22:16 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f196.google.com ([209.85.214.196]:32770 "EHLO mail-pl1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726580AbfE1MWP (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 May 2019 08:22:15 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f196.google.com with SMTP id g21so8299339plq.0; Tue, 28 May 2019 05:22:15 -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=AJ8VRsxsoWGs/vBSV1ADUeGhgVxuJp/KwJ0JXgr2QW8=; b=nOfmaveBw33qA+XOhBteLcPyL6U0iAwH31DZFkeev74RKVWIws7CENGYDnihRDjxvn nCSw3qHhQW9dZsKA3TKHyivcfswE3XdA9LbjIbTloBrbMUu3qCfhcahqTPjJl0c2BHwF Ba2JzCTarLEOdUUnVtU94PDddmwZRE2ZSfocpESfyPTDwtaK8r/Oo7dIbyD+lJR2PkZe z5yy6U4PyW7okX5RiXlxAYZTR2aoWnaWNfGqD1u7PcQRsptm3U1jVZdg5qnUVZ1mJufG ED5ixHOJ4Tos/q69eKg1psE/LcRiqlnlfCoTm84cOZT5jDb6CrabqUYSIp1T62ntfYa1 mJ1Q== 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=AJ8VRsxsoWGs/vBSV1ADUeGhgVxuJp/KwJ0JXgr2QW8=; b=KEIjPYaCo70DO6UleQTqGbwfnDv1j5ShkAi5VDvY0iOR4aPa/dM3iK/wPk7H4Gwk+I q2p9tFBzbMGoIvBqcqiR1qV2CPwZVAQP1rbfxxuwddEQrmF5rWzqcOwoVXwguhcV1O+Y YwO9LDRAW4C2p9qnyERJqlmrhYW7hBm3kkY1YDFVdFLFZmtFUJesfmIlALs35p1mLu3+ VT6N41NNUGiB6WCbVoFH0fWPQ8u9jY+6NqG6dtpxvckaCv+euK2ngMYhKleC7DKT/Knm N0A9cYj9y0k8cZ1dSlvIwWFEj0pqqq5fdhJwctHX6GlhaKx/+awyBerX5A0zdzq0b7U0 OxuA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWoJuP1AJQD3lNUkCbuKGtv1lvAK5BNH7b87sEqRJfGJn8qYVtl bAU8Raoa2c0aFd4SrMrIMwo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyxBBA1c7fo0kmqewKRmZb4uXkX32qK6cXRlHYmibj6AYwQWFyVNY2kFpvESFd+P8Oc5wfClw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8a91:: with SMTP id p17mr70129886plo.60.1559046134645; Tue, 28 May 2019 05:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2401:fa00:d:0:98f1:8b3d:1f37:3e8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o7sm18655494pfp.168.2019.05.28.05.22.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 28 May 2019 05:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 21:22:07 +0900 From: Minchan Kim To: Michal Hocko Cc: Daniel Colascione , 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: <20190528122207.GD30365@google.com> References: <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> <20190528114436.GB30365@google.com> <20190528120614.GB1658@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190528120614.GB1658@dhcp22.suse.cz> 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 02:06:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 28-05-19 20:44:36, Minchan Kim wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 01:28:40PM +0200, 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 > > > > Think about MADV_FREE. Allocator would think the chunk is worth to mark > > "freeable" but soon, user of the allocator asked the chunk - ie, it's not > > freeable any longer once user start to use it. > > That is not a race in the address space, right. The underlying object > hasn't changed. It has been declared as freeable and since that moment > nobody can rely on the content because it might have been discarded. > Or put simply, the content is undefined. It is responsibility of the > madvise caller to make sure that the object is not in active use while > it is marking it. > > > My point is that kinds of *hints* are always racy so any synchronization > > couldn't help a lot. That's why I want to restrict hints process_madvise > > supports as such kinds of non-destruptive one at next respin. > > I agree that a non-destructive operations are safer against paralel > modifications because you just get a annoying and unexpected latency at > worst case. But we should discuss whether this assumption is sufficient > for further development. I am pretty sure once we open remote madvise > people will find usecases for destructive operations or even new madvise > modes we haven't heard of. What then? I support Daniel's vma seq number approach for the future plan.