Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-106279-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240311164638.2015063-1-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
 <2cb8f02d-f21e-45d2-afe2-d1c6225240f3@zytor.com> <ZfNTSjfE_w50Otnz@casper.infradead.org>
 <2qp4uegb4kqkryihqyo6v3fzoc2nysuhltc535kxnh6ozpo5ni@isilzw7nth42>
 <ZfNWojLB7qjjB0Zw@casper.infradead.org> <CA+CK2bAmOj2J10szVijNikexFZ1gmA913vvxnqW4DJKWQikwqQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <39F17EC4-7844-4111-BF7D-FFC97B05D9FA@zytor.com> <CA+CK2bDothmwdJ86K1LiKWDKdWdYDjg5WCwdbapL9c3Y_Sf+kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <bb203717ab644362a8eafe78aff23947@AcuMS.aculab.com> <CA+CK2bAuNLXq4p8pjwAatuw2KuadhKjD6JRwJN8ZvSEd1d7ntA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+CK2bAuNLXq4p8pjwAatuw2KuadhKjD6JRwJN8ZvSEd1d7ntA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 11:13:30 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+CK2bCpg9ND7FbbA7R_BK5FjR+rMA6DUoaCXmre70xNQXZoLw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/14] Dynamic Kernel Stacks
To: David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, 
	Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>, 
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>, 
	"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>, 
	"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>, "brauner@kernel.org" <brauner@kernel.org>, 
	"bristot@redhat.com" <bristot@redhat.com>, "bsegall@google.com" <bsegall@google.com>, 
	"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, 
	"dianders@chromium.org" <dianders@chromium.org>, 
	"dietmar.eggemann@arm.com" <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, 
	"eric.devolder@oracle.com" <eric.devolder@oracle.com>, "hca@linux.ibm.com" <hca@linux.ibm.com>, 
	"hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>, 
	"jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com" <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>, "jgg@ziepe.ca" <jgg@ziepe.ca>, 
	"jpoimboe@kernel.org" <jpoimboe@kernel.org>, "jroedel@suse.de" <jroedel@suse.de>, 
	"juri.lelli@redhat.com" <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, "kinseyho@google.com" <kinseyho@google.com>, 
	"kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>, "lstoakes@gmail.com" <lstoakes@gmail.com>, 
	"luto@kernel.org" <luto@kernel.org>, "mgorman@suse.de" <mgorman@suse.de>, "mic@digikod.net" <mic@digikod.net>, 
	"michael.christie@oracle.com" <michael.christie@oracle.com>, "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>, 
	"mjguzik@gmail.com" <mjguzik@gmail.com>, "mst@redhat.com" <mst@redhat.com>, 
	"npiggin@gmail.com" <npiggin@gmail.com>, "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>, 
	"pmladek@suse.com" <pmladek@suse.com>, 
	"rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>, "rostedt@goodmis.org" <rostedt@goodmis.org>, 
	"surenb@google.com" <surenb@google.com>, "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>, 
	"urezki@gmail.com" <urezki@gmail.com>, 
	"vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, "vschneid@redhat.com" <vschneid@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 11:09=E2=80=AFAM Pasha Tatashin
<pasha.tatashin@soleen.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2024 at 2:58=E2=80=AFPM David Laight <David.Laight@aculab=
com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Pasha Tatashin
> > > Sent: 16 March 2024 19:18
> > ...
> > > Expanding on Mathew's idea of an interface for dynamic kernel stack
> > > sizes, here's what I'm thinking:
> > >
> > > - Kernel Threads: Create all kernel threads with a fully populated
> > > THREAD_SIZE stack.  (i.e. 16K)
> > > - User Threads: Create all user threads with THREAD_SIZE kernel stack
> > > but only the top page mapped. (i.e. 4K)
> > > - In enter_from_user_mode(): Expand the thread stack to 16K by mappin=
g
> > > three additional pages from the per-CPU stack cache. This function is
> > > called early in kernel entry points.
> > > - exit_to_user_mode(): Unmap the extra three pages and return them to
> > > the per-CPU cache. This function is called late in the kernel exit
> > > path.
> >
> > Isn't that entirely horrid for TLB use and so will require a lot of IPI=
?
>
> The TLB load is going to be exactly the same as today, we already use
> small pages for VMA mapped stacks. We won't need to have extra
> flushing either, the mappings are in the kernel space, and once pages
> are removed from the page table, no one is going to access that VA
> space until that thread enters the kernel again. We will need to
> invalidate the VA range only when the pages are mapped, and only on
> the local cpu.

The TLB miss rate is going to slightly increase, but very slightly,
because stacks are small 4-pages with only 3-dynamic pages, and
therefore only up-to 2-3 new misses per syscalls, and that is only for
the complicated deep syscalls, therefore, I suspect it won't affect
the real world performance.

> > Remember, if a thread sleeps in 'extra stack' and is then resheduled
> > on a different cpu the extra pages get 'pumped' from one cpu to
> > another.
>
> Yes, the per-cpu cache can get unbalanced this way, we can remember
> the original CPU where we acquired the pages to return to the same
> place.
>
> > I also suspect a stack_probe() is likely to end up being a cache miss
> > and also slow???
>
> Can you please elaborate on this point. I am not aware of
> stack_probe() and how it is used.
>
> > So you wouldn't want one on all calls.
> > I'm not sure you'd want a conditional branch either.
> >
> > The explicit request for 'more stack' can be required to be allowed
> > to sleep - removing a lot of issues.
> > It would also be portable to all architectures.
> > I'd also suspect that any thread that needs extra stack is likely
> > to need to again.
> > So while the memory could be recovered, I'd bet is isn't worth
> > doing except under memory pressure.
> > The call could also return 'no' - perhaps useful for (broken) code
> > that insists on being recursive.
>
> The current approach discussed is somewhat different from explicit
> more stack requests API. I am investigating how feasible it is to use
> kernel stack multiplexing, so the same pages can be re-used by many
> threads when they are actually used. If the multiplexing approach
> won't work, I will come back to the explicit more stack API.
>
> > Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, M=
K1 1PT, UK
> > Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)