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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 055A2C33CB6 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 15:58:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B296A21582 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 15:58:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=shutemov-name.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@shutemov-name.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="A++MSgED" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B296A21582 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=shutemov.name Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 53FE96B04BF; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:58:41 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 4F1196B04C0; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:58:41 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 406466B04C1; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:58:41 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0183.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.183]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28FAC6B04BF for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:58:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin01.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D31D44417 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 15:58:40 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76387584000.01.glue81_68cc56527e50e X-HE-Tag: glue81_68cc56527e50e X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 6583 Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com (mail-lj1-f195.google.com [209.85.208.195]) by imf16.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 15:58:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id j1so26946979lja.2 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 07:58:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=shutemov-name.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=y+sOBVwPXHpl/jOGredPdQ/eMOPx1R53v2YKaybpo74=; b=A++MSgEDqeaqay+NQuCUGyeIN2kG3UsGiJA8e/G48HxQP8Bai+mCDaVLzeYStNnnDm OyvxPnQSMyas2dvhw+Ev+6t/pEUZAXksiKLHl+1AfZmB/wgG7IV+a0lbL4wum4G6josY AO6GhNHfbnpj4l3ztmzAa6Rk91MIiFzabf08PaVz/+GXjOHNdQ2EjEUOtxuJRRED7yjI 9aW6ceb4+In7CtnXksxhGhzmTu50yp71ijp3ckj5puwmhwt5XYU8PEJmdjf0AB7UaZ2V yFMfdhKaeZQBSkydOifCuhn2wGgnSlIM20Md1n144gVX9DwAYQDUtbf8a7Oxgq5qbq57 oMhg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=y+sOBVwPXHpl/jOGredPdQ/eMOPx1R53v2YKaybpo74=; b=aENZIcPaoguXpvWe0sggHBlHionMBq/JhL7+7AuP+dH+QFq8X+a+meUrXCUPfw0NjP HPt4YjNcVDqNZVVrpwULVMfM1XdhOPOM63MtXy6XlhkR9Tq2/R7fC9jLSFjp752YKEb1 wxw40gyLuS/OdKaj1Y7RgeRjWl8/Ps9gu15M2/yJmgXhkHJBggQfPx8bNdahhNdJMIXl zOcw/lkc75Nzdf6m3drWitwNEuXEBF1rDZK/jzWqlIAiQh8nZmuRh6LsgfFfAGkkssPO 0w9Sl61m2QnzgWyK1K+POgOX1vBNgOy8KAQSm+JPuSg0Fb629IXIR6O5rQjfvAL5Vv9I xc5Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXJ5i652zQe1JVqN+w4Uv7YqycSbRLkY0PpIAYwiiwLKuMGSpBc CxhNJuzobBMCmS3YWsvMRSm6qg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxrmQaVRsNtHHNzyFR0xx1ZpXxJ6+StbGbRoizxb9hy6Tpqd1hlRsR9BMFheoCQmtN8dCj4Uw== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9a04:: with SMTP id o4mr6084808lji.214.1579276718652; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 07:58:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from box.localdomain ([86.57.175.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q186sm12694326ljq.14.2020.01.17.07.58.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 17 Jan 2020 07:58:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by box.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3729B100CFF; Fri, 17 Jan 2020 18:58:37 +0300 (+03) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 18:58:37 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Michal Hocko Cc: Minchan Kim , Andrew Morton , LKML , linux-mm , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, oleksandr@redhat.com, Suren Baghdasaryan , Tim Murray , Daniel Colascione , Sandeep Patil , Sonny Rao , Brian Geffon , Johannes Weiner , Shakeel Butt , John Dias , ktkhai@virtuozzo.com, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, sjpark@amazon.de Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: introduce external memory hinting API Message-ID: <20200117155837.bowyjpndfiym6cgs@box> References: <20200116235953.163318-1-minchan@kernel.org> <20200116235953.163318-3-minchan@kernel.org> <20200117115225.GV19428@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200117115225.GV19428@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:52:25PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 16-01-20 15:59:50, Minchan Kim wrote: > > There is usecase that System Management Software(SMS) want to give > > a memory hint like MADV_[COLD|PAGEEOUT] to other processes and > > in the case of Android, it is the ActivityManagerService. > > > > It's similar in spirit to madvise(MADV_WONTNEED), but the information > > required to make the reclaim decision is not known to the app. Instead, > > it is known to the centralized userspace daemon(ActivityManagerService), > > and that daemon must be able to initiate reclaim on its own without > > any app involvement. > > > > To solve the issue, this patch introduces new syscall process_madvise(2). > > It uses pidfd of an external processs to give the hint. > > > > int process_madvise(int pidfd, void *addr, size_t length, int advise, > > unsigned long flag); > > > > Since it could affect other process's address range, only privileged > > process(CAP_SYS_PTRACE) or something else(e.g., being the same UID) > > gives it the right to ptrace the process could use it successfully. > > The flag argument is reserved for future use if we need to extend the > > API. > > > > I think supporting all hints madvise has/will supported/support to > > process_madvise is rather risky. Because we are not sure all hints make > > sense from external process and implementation for the hint may rely on > > the caller being in the current context so it could be error-prone. > > Thus, I just limited hints as MADV_[COLD|PAGEOUT] in this patch. > > > > If someone want to add other hints, we could hear hear the usecase and > > review it for each hint. It's more safe for maintainace rather than > > introducing a buggy syscall but hard to fix it later. > > I have brought this up when we discussed this in the past but there is > no reflection on that here so let me bring that up again. > > I believe that the interface has an inherent problem that it is racy. > The external entity needs to know the address space layout of the target > process to do anyhing useful on it. The address space is however under > the full control of the target process though and the external entity > has no means to find out that the layout has changed. So > time-to-check-time-to-act is an inherent problem. > > This is a serious design flaw and it should be explained why it doesn't > matter or how to use the interface properly to prevent that problem. I agree, it looks flawed. Also I don't see what System Management Software can generically do on sub-process level. I mean how can it decide which part of address space is less important than other. I see how a manager can indicate that this process (or a group of processes) is less important than other, but on per-addres-range basis? -- Kirill A. Shutemov