On 29.02.24 07:09, Peng Zhang wrote:
> From: ZhangPeng <[email protected]>
>
> The major fault occurred when using mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE)
> in application, which leading to an unexpected issue[1].
>
> This caused by temporarily cleared PTE during a read+clear/modify/write
> update of the PTE, eg, do_numa_page()/change_pte_range().
>
> For the data segment of the user-mode program, the global variable area
> is a private mapping. After the pagecache is loaded, the private anonymous
> page is generated after the COW is triggered. Mlockall can lock COW pages
> (anonymous pages), but the original file pages cannot be locked and may
> be reclaimed. If the global variable (private anon page) is accessed when
> vmf->pte is zeroed in numa fault, a file page fault will be triggered.
> At this time, the original private file page may have been reclaimed.
> If the page cache is not available at this time, a major fault will be
> triggered and the file will be read, causing additional overhead.
>
> This issue affects our traffic analysis service. The inbound traffic is
> heavy. If a major fault occurs, the I/O schedule is triggered and the
> original I/O is suspended. Generally, the I/O schedule is 0.7 ms. If
> other applications are operating disks, the system needs to wait for
> more than 10 ms. However, the inbound traffic is heavy and the NIC buffer
> is small. As a result, packet loss occurs. But the traffic analysis service
> can't tolerate packet loss.
>
> Fix this by holding PTL and rechecking the PTE in filemap_fault() before
> triggering a major fault. We do this check only if vma is VM_LOCKED. In
> our service test environment, the baseline is 7 major faults / 12 hours.
> After the patch is applied, no major fault will be triggered.
>
> Testing file anonymous page read and write page fault performance in
> ext4, tmpfs and ramdisk using will-it-scale[2] on a x86 physical machine.
> The data is the average change compared with the mainline after the patch
> is applied. The test results are indicates some performance regressions.
> We do this check only if vma is VM_LOCKED, therefore, no performance
> regressions is caused for most common cases.
>
> The test results are as follows:
> processes processes_idle threads threads_idle
> ext4 private file write: -0.51% 0.08% -0.03% -0.04%
> ext4 shared file write: 0.135% -0.531% 2.883% -0.772%
> ramdisk private file write: -0.48% 0.23% -1.08% 0.27%
> ramdisk private file read: 0.07% -6.90% -5.85% -0.70%
> tmpfs private file write: -0.344% -0.110% 0.200% 0.145%
> tmpfs shared file write: 0.958% 0.101% 2.781% -0.337%
> tmpfs private file read: -0.16% 0.00% -0.12% 0.41%
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/[email protected]/
> [2] https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale/
>
> Suggested-by: "Huang, Ying" <[email protected]>
> Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: ZhangPeng <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
> ---
> v2->v3:
> - Do this check only if vma is VM_LOCKED per David Hildenbrand
> - Hold PTL and recheck the PTE
> - Place the recheck code in a new function filemap_fault_recheck_pte()
>
> v1->v2:
> - Add more test results per Huang, Ying
> - Add more comments before check PTE per Huang, Ying, David Hildenbrand
> and Yin Fengwei
> - Change pte_offset_map_nolock to pte_offset_map as the PTL won't
> be used
>
> RFC->v1:
> - Add error handling when ptep == NULL per Huang, Ying and Matthew
> Wilcox
> - Check the PTE without acquiring PTL in filemap_fault(), suggested by
> Huang, Ying and Yin Fengwei
> - Add pmd_none() check before PTE map
> - Update commit message and add performance test information
>
> mm/filemap.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index b4858d89f1b1..2668bac68df7 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -3181,6 +3181,42 @@ static struct file *do_async_mmap_readahead(struct vm_fault *vmf,
> return fpin;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * filemap_fault_recheck_pte - hold PTL and recheck whether pte is none.
> + * @vmf - the vm_fault for this fault.
> + *
> + * Recheck PTE as the PTE can be cleared temporarily during a read+clear/modify
> + * /write update of the PTE, eg, do_numa_page()/change_pte_range(). This will
> + * trigger an unexpected major fault, even if we use mlockall(), which may
> + * increase IO and thus cause other unexpected behavior.
> + *
> + * Return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE if the PTE is not none or pte_offset_map_lock()
> + * fails. In other cases, 0 is returned.
> + */
That documentation is imprecise, as you are not explaining the mlock
limitation.
It's an internal helper, I'd drop all that and rather add a comment
below right next to the conditions that are performing the check ...
> +static vm_fault_t filemap_fault_recheck_pte(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> +{
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
> + vm_fault_t ret = 0;
> + pte_t *ptep;
> +
> + if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED))
> + return ret;
I was wondering if we also want to do:
if (!is_cow_mappinng(vma->vm_flags))
return 0;
But likely it's not helpful.
Then add something like:
/*
* We might have COW'ed a pageache folio and might now have an mlocked
* anon folio mapped. The original pagecache folio is not mlocked and
* might have been evicted. During a read+clear/modify/write update of
* the PTE, such as done in do_numa_page()/change_pte_range(), we
* temporarily clear the PTE under PT lock and might detect it here as
* "none" when not holding the PT lock.
*
* Not rechecking the PTE under PT lock could result in an
* unexpected major fault in an mlock'ed region. Recheck only for
* this special scenario while holding the PT lock, to not degrade
* non-mlocked scenarios.
*/
> +
> + if (pmd_none(*vmf->pmd))
> + return ret;
I'd simply return 0 in both cases, easier to read.
> +
> + ptep = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
> + &vmf->ptl);
> + if (unlikely(!ptep))
> + return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE;
> +
> + if (unlikely(!pte_none(ptep_get(ptep))))
> + ret = VM_FAULT_NOPAGE;
> +
> + pte_unmap_unlock(ptep, vmf->ptl);
> + return ret;
> +}
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
On 2024/2/29 16:56, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 29.02.24 07:09, Peng Zhang wrote:
>> From: ZhangPeng <[email protected]>
>>
>> The major fault occurred when using mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE)
>> in application, which leading to an unexpected issue[1].
>>
>> This caused by temporarily cleared PTE during a read+clear/modify/write
>> update of the PTE, eg, do_numa_page()/change_pte_range().
>>
>> For the data segment of the user-mode program, the global variable area
>> is a private mapping. After the pagecache is loaded, the private
>> anonymous
>> page is generated after the COW is triggered. Mlockall can lock COW
>> pages
>> (anonymous pages), but the original file pages cannot be locked and may
>> be reclaimed. If the global variable (private anon page) is accessed
>> when
>> vmf->pte is zeroed in numa fault, a file page fault will be triggered.
>> At this time, the original private file page may have been reclaimed.
>> If the page cache is not available at this time, a major fault will be
>> triggered and the file will be read, causing additional overhead.
>>
>> This issue affects our traffic analysis service. The inbound traffic is
>> heavy. If a major fault occurs, the I/O schedule is triggered and the
>> original I/O is suspended. Generally, the I/O schedule is 0.7 ms. If
>> other applications are operating disks, the system needs to wait for
>> more than 10 ms. However, the inbound traffic is heavy and the NIC
>> buffer
>> is small. As a result, packet loss occurs. But the traffic analysis
>> service
>> can't tolerate packet loss.
>>
>> Fix this by holding PTL and rechecking the PTE in filemap_fault() before
>> triggering a major fault. We do this check only if vma is VM_LOCKED. In
>> our service test environment, the baseline is 7 major faults / 12 hours.
>> After the patch is applied, no major fault will be triggered.
>>
>> Testing file anonymous page read and write page fault performance in
>> ext4, tmpfs and ramdisk using will-it-scale[2] on a x86 physical
>> machine.
>> The data is the average change compared with the mainline after the
>> patch
>> is applied. The test results are indicates some performance regressions.
>> We do this check only if vma is VM_LOCKED, therefore, no performance
>> regressions is caused for most common cases.
>>
>> The test results are as follows:
>> processes processes_idle threads threads_idle
>> ext4 private file write: -0.51% 0.08% -0.03% -0.04%
>> ext4 shared file write: 0.135% -0.531% 2.883% -0.772%
>> ramdisk private file write: -0.48% 0.23% -1.08% 0.27%
>> ramdisk private file read: 0.07% -6.90% -5.85% -0.70%
>> tmpfs private file write: -0.344% -0.110% 0.200% 0.145%
>> tmpfs shared file write: 0.958% 0.101% 2.781% -0.337%
>> tmpfs private file read: -0.16% 0.00% -0.12% 0.41%
>>
>> [1]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/[email protected]/
>> [2] https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale/
>>
>> Suggested-by: "Huang, Ying" <[email protected]>
>> Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: ZhangPeng <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> v2->v3:
>> - Do this check only if vma is VM_LOCKED per David Hildenbrand
>> - Hold PTL and recheck the PTE
>> - Place the recheck code in a new function filemap_fault_recheck_pte()
>>
>> v1->v2:
>> - Add more test results per Huang, Ying
>> - Add more comments before check PTE per Huang, Ying, David Hildenbrand
>> and Yin Fengwei
>> - Change pte_offset_map_nolock to pte_offset_map as the PTL won't
>> be used
>>
>> RFC->v1:
>> - Add error handling when ptep == NULL per Huang, Ying and Matthew
>> Wilcox
>> - Check the PTE without acquiring PTL in filemap_fault(), suggested by
>> Huang, Ying and Yin Fengwei
>> - Add pmd_none() check before PTE map
>> - Update commit message and add performance test information
>>
>> mm/filemap.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
>> index b4858d89f1b1..2668bac68df7 100644
>> --- a/mm/filemap.c
>> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
>> @@ -3181,6 +3181,42 @@ static struct file
>> *do_async_mmap_readahead(struct vm_fault *vmf,
>> return fpin;
>> }
>> +/*
>> + * filemap_fault_recheck_pte - hold PTL and recheck whether pte is
>> none.
>> + * @vmf - the vm_fault for this fault.
>> + *
>> + * Recheck PTE as the PTE can be cleared temporarily during a
>> read+clear/modify
>> + * /write update of the PTE, eg, do_numa_page()/change_pte_range().
>> This will
>> + * trigger an unexpected major fault, even if we use mlockall(),
>> which may
>> + * increase IO and thus cause other unexpected behavior.
>> + *
>> + * Return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE if the PTE is not none or
>> pte_offset_map_lock()
>> + * fails. In other cases, 0 is returned.
>> + */
>
> That documentation is imprecise, as you are not explaining the mlock
> limitation.
>
> It's an internal helper, I'd drop all that and rather add a comment
> below right next to the conditions that are performing the check ...
>
That makes sense.
>> +static vm_fault_t filemap_fault_recheck_pte(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>> +{
>> + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
>> + vm_fault_t ret = 0;
>> + pte_t *ptep;
>> +
>> + if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED))
>> + return ret;
>
> I was wondering if we also want to do:
>
> if (!is_cow_mappinng(vma->vm_flags))
> return 0;
>
> But likely it's not helpful.
>
Maybe it's enough to check if the VMA is VM_LOCKED?
No performance degradation for most common scenarios.
>
> Then add something like:
>
> /*
> * We might have COW'ed a pageache folio and might now have an mlocked
Nit: s/pageache/pagecache
> * anon folio mapped. The original pagecache folio is not mlocked and
> * might have been evicted. During a read+clear/modify/write update of
> * the PTE, such as done in do_numa_page()/change_pte_range(), we
> * temporarily clear the PTE under PT lock and might detect it here as
> * "none" when not holding the PT lock.
> *
> * Not rechecking the PTE under PT lock could result in an
> * unexpected major fault in an mlock'ed region. Recheck only for
> * this special scenario while holding the PT lock, to not degrade
> * non-mlocked scenarios.
> */
>
Thanks!
I'll add these comments in the next version.
>> +
>> + if (pmd_none(*vmf->pmd))
>> + return ret;
>
> I'd simply return 0 in both cases, easier to read.
>
Agreed.
>> +
>> + ptep = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->address,
>> + &vmf->ptl);
>> + if (unlikely(!ptep))
>> + return VM_FAULT_NOPAGE;
>> +
>> + if (unlikely(!pte_none(ptep_get(ptep))))
>> + ret = VM_FAULT_NOPAGE;
>> +
>> + pte_unmap_unlock(ptep, vmf->ptl);
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>
--
Best Regards,
Peng