Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-100812-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Message-ID: <f949f712-eacf-49a0-91ea-8062e2d1f5e0@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 14:36:27 -0700
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/14] Dynamic Kernel Stacks
Content-Language: en-US
To: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, x86@kernel.org, bp@alien8.de,
        brauner@kernel.org, bristot@redhat.com, bsegall@google.com,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, dianders@chromium.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, eric.devolder@oracle.com, hca@linux.ibm.com,
        hch@infradead.org, jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com, jgg@ziepe.ca,
        jpoimboe@kernel.org, jroedel@suse.de, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        kent.overstreet@linux.dev, kinseyho@google.com,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, lstoakes@gmail.com, luto@kernel.org,
        mgorman@suse.de, mic@digikod.net, michael.christie@oracle.com,
        mingo@redhat.com, mjguzik@gmail.com, mst@redhat.com, npiggin@gmail.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, pmladek@suse.com, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, surenb@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
        urezki@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, vschneid@redhat.com
References: <20240311164638.2015063-1-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
 <2cb8f02d-f21e-45d2-afe2-d1c6225240f3@zytor.com>
 <CA+CK2bC+bgOfohCEEW7nwAdakVmzg=RhUjjw=+Rw3wFALnOq-Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+CK2bC+bgOfohCEEW7nwAdakVmzg=RhUjjw=+Rw3wFALnOq-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 3/12/24 12:45, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
>>
>> Ok, first of all, talking about "kernel memory" here is misleading.
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> I re-read my cover letter, and I do not see where "kernel memory" is
> mentioned. We are talking about kernel stacks overhead that is
> proportional to the user workload, as every active thread has an
> associated kernel stack. The idea is to save memory by not
> pre-allocating all pages of kernel-stacks, but instead use it as a
> safeguard when a stack actually becomes deep. Come-up with a solution
> that can handle rare deeper stacks only when needed. This could be
> done through faulting on the supported hardware (as proposed in this
> series), or via pre-map on every schedule event, and checking the
> access when thread goes off cpu (as proposed by Andy Lutomirski to
> avoid double faults on x86) .
> 
> In other words, this feature is only about one very specific type of
> kernel memory that is not even directly mapped (the feature required
> vmapped stacks).
> 
>> Unless your threads are spending nearly all their time sleeping, the
>> threads will occupy stack and TLS memory in user space as well.
> 
> Can you please elaborate, what data is contained in the kernel stack
> when thread is in user space? My series requires thread_info not to be
> in the stack by depending on THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK.
> 

My point is that what matters is total memory use, not just memory used 
in the kernel. Amdahl's law.

	-hpa