From: jeffxu@chromium.org
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, willy@infradead.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com,
pedro.falcato@gmail.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
jeffxu@google.com, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com,
mpe@ellerman.id.au, oliver.sang@intel.com, vbabka@suse.cz,
keescook@chromium.org, Jeff Xu <jeffxu@chromium.org>
Subject: [PATCH v1 0/2] mremap refactor: check src address for vma boundaries first.
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 07:14:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240814071424.2655666-1-jeffxu@chromium.org> (raw)
From: Jeff Xu <jeffxu@chromium.org>
mremap doesn't allow relocate, expand, shrink across VMA boundaries,
refactor the code to check src address range before doing anything on
the destination, i.e. destination won't be unmapped, if src address
failed the boundaries check.
This also allows us to remove can_modify_mm from mremap.c, since
the src address must be single VMA, can_modify_vma is used.
It is likely this will improve the performance on mremap, previously
the code does sealing check using can_modify_mm for the src address range,
and the new code removed the loop (used by can_modify_mm).
In order to verify this patch doesn't regress on mremap, I added tests in
mseal_test, the test patch can be applied before mremap refactor patch or
checkin independently.
Also this patch doesn't change mseal's existing schematic: if sealing fail,
user can expect the src/dst address isn't updated. So this patch can be
applied regardless if we decided to go with current out-of-loop approach
or in-loop approach currently in discussion.
Regarding the perf test report by stress-ng [1] title:
8be7258aad: stress-ng.pagemove.page_remaps_per_sec -4.4% regression
The test is using below for testing:
stress-ng --timeout 60 --times --verify --metrics --no-rand-seed --pagemove 64
I can't repro this using ChromeOS, the pagemove test shows large value
of stddev and stderr, and can't reasonably refect the performance impact.
For example: I write a c program [2] to run the above pagemove test 10 times
and calculate the stddev, stderr, for 3 commits:
1> before mseal feature is added:
Ops/sec:
Mean : 3564.40
Std Dev : 2737.35 (76.80% of Mean)
Std Err : 865.63 (24.29% of Mean)
2> after mseal feature is added:
Ops/sec:
Mean : 2703.84
Std Dev : 2085.13 (77.12% of Mean)
Std Err : 659.38 (24.39% of Mean)
3> after current patch (mremap refactor)
Ops/sec:
Mean : 3603.67
Std Dev : 2422.22 (67.22% of Mean)
Std Err : 765.97 (21.26% of Mean)
The result shows 21%-24% stderr, this means whatever perf improvment/impact
there might be won't be measured correctly by this test.
This test machine has 32G memory, Intel(R) Celeron(R) 7305, 5 CPU.
And I reboot the machine before each test, and take the first 10 runs with
run_stress_ng 10
(I will run longer duration to see if test still shows large stdDev,StdErr)
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202408041602.caa0372-oliver.sang@intel.com/
[2] https://github.com/peaktocreek/mmperf/blob/main/run_stress_ng.c
Jeff Xu (2):
mseal:selftest mremap across VMA boundaries.
mseal: refactor mremap to remove can_modify_mm
mm/internal.h | 24 ++
mm/mremap.c | 77 +++----
mm/mseal.c | 17 --
tools/testing/selftests/mm/mseal_test.c | 293 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
4 files changed, 353 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
--
2.46.0.76.ge559c4bf1a-goog
next reply other threads:[~2024-08-14 7:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-14 7:14 jeffxu [this message]
2024-08-14 7:14 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] mseal:selftest mremap across VMA boundaries jeffxu
2024-08-14 7:14 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] mseal: refactor mremap to remove can_modify_mm jeffxu
2024-08-14 14:39 ` [PATCH v1 0/2] mremap refactor: check src address for vma boundaries first Liam R. Howlett
2024-08-14 16:57 ` Jeff Xu
2024-08-14 19:55 ` Liam R. Howlett
2024-08-15 3:45 ` Jeff Xu
2024-08-15 16:49 ` Liam R. Howlett
2024-08-15 17:22 ` Jeff Xu
2024-08-15 20:14 ` Liam R. Howlett
2024-08-15 20:23 ` Jeff Xu
2024-08-15 20:40 ` Liam R. Howlett
2024-08-15 18:16 ` Jeff Xu
2024-08-15 20:19 ` Jeff Xu
2024-08-16 2:39 ` Oliver Sang
2024-08-16 2:58 ` Jeff Xu
2024-08-18 9:28 ` Oliver Sang
2024-08-19 1:38 ` Oliver Sang
2024-08-19 6:35 ` Oliver Sang
2024-08-21 6:19 ` Oliver Sang
2024-08-21 15:21 ` Jeff Xu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240814071424.2655666-1-jeffxu@chromium.org \
--to=jeffxu@chromium.org \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jeffxu@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=pedro.falcato@gmail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox