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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFD9AC25B4E for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 08:52:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D0F616B0072; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 03:52:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id CC0486B0073; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 03:52:47 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B87016B0074; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 03:52:47 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9D5F6B0072 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 03:52:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin04.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B6ACC04A3 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 08:52:47 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80374561974.04.9183272 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) by imf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D5FF1A000C for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 08:52:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=rVOftAen; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.220.28 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1674204765; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=NPjXf88ZU8FVuBa4GWfXY3q6lH6kqoJUTnCqbetZU5Y=; b=pSMbJTfbZxoW8RCV1AXWI8hj5ZAqixZQgExV7MTEh9po/VRfzfOlGbGrUztQoKBEJCepRq uPkANeRARTopuoizTeitIgolfKyKlvj7MCoUVTmX4INLVRi5d4c5eb7COEgpS0Uccz8cL/ cIV093EYtqRRn+WcBo8fu2qH873ofFE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=rVOftAen; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.220.28 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1674204765; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=WsIbKCL2KYdHxU9BcF9m59wp/D7pAFPCiZ6ScvOP51CnFk1SbnmjQzcr12aQy1KJv948y5 fJJTBwTIS/44w7B7Z4Jcedq+vvBJZWw8WRtYa/R8DQLaPgJDgecIAfbVAxHQEg7Xaa1Wxo pKD+W6OAr1+fgTi7c3+zHIzKea1tGXs= Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4440228BD; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 08:52:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1674204763; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=NPjXf88ZU8FVuBa4GWfXY3q6lH6kqoJUTnCqbetZU5Y=; b=rVOftAenNnA8PiL17Z4Pvgxr3PGI5zIZDNJZhTWOuwjNH7ZF8duaDITjsCCPVYUUl+4mAF SsZLXg+YuWZWmpQYKnBigdv+oOwpwP8b3sMrIOZpOAVevFZTdzxUdshJBulqHxA0CeorJN JV/cNcPxjm+c/YD6MkjUZzLm2MN4Cno= Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B24EA13251; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 08:52:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id hsl6K1tWymP+HQAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Fri, 20 Jan 2023 08:52:43 +0000 Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 09:52:43 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Suren Baghdasaryan Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, michel@lespinasse.org, jglisse@google.com, vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net, dave@stgolabs.net, willy@infradead.org, liam.howlett@oracle.com, peterz@infradead.org, ldufour@linux.ibm.com, laurent.dufour@fr.ibm.com, paulmck@kernel.org, luto@kernel.org, songliubraving@fb.com, peterx@redhat.com, david@redhat.com, dhowells@redhat.com, hughd@google.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de, kent.overstreet@linux.dev, punit.agrawal@bytedance.com, lstoakes@gmail.com, peterjung1337@gmail.com, rientjes@google.com, axelrasmussen@google.com, joelaf@google.com, minchan@google.com, jannh@google.com, shakeelb@google.com, tatashin@google.com, edumazet@google.com, gthelen@google.com, gurua@google.com, arjunroy@google.com, soheil@google.com, hughlynch@google.com, leewalsh@google.com, posk@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 39/41] kernel/fork: throttle call_rcu() calls in vm_area_free Message-ID: References: <20230109205336.3665937-1-surenb@google.com> <20230109205336.3665937-40-surenb@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7D5FF1A000C X-Stat-Signature: t599x9xe6tshhxdgbohd5buwsi7xrnwy X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam08 X-HE-Tag: 1674204765-883938 X-HE-Meta: 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 R6tNrLid T1YdWfqetHyu4BBsolKDibO/g51hLvsF+9KwpYpmwEVfVBQpPwUiAcRS7qhp00eo7ktt8fvKI09WZ7flGQgDw0O+fqj85Jb2HvlIGAZzzxmDYbIAn1DmcCW7oIDzQA71FOfC4/ZjuOHimFXk0AqCL45OyJK/gKkIT2VSv++2Rri8d2m0+Tu73MmzthdA2UHhRdqEmBwz3GPix+VF0OLAZ7zrW7QT+FssXiRkYgj0fiK/MPQczcUwP1p1RTYbdGrdfjxXJiUVcMwkTfb4= 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 Thu 19-01-23 10:52:03, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 4:59 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Mon 09-01-23 12:53:34, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > call_rcu() can take a long time when callback offloading is enabled. > > > Its use in the vm_area_free can cause regressions in the exit path when > > > multiple VMAs are being freed. To minimize that impact, place VMAs into > > > a list and free them in groups using one call_rcu() call per group. > > > > After some more clarification I can understand how call_rcu might not be > > super happy about thousands of callbacks to be invoked and I do agree > > that this is not really optimal. > > > > On the other hand I do not like this solution much either. > > VM_AREA_FREE_LIST_MAX is arbitrary and it won't really help all that > > much with processes with a huge number of vmas either. It would still be > > in housands of callbacks to be scheduled without a good reason. > > > > Instead, are there any other cases than remove_vma that need this > > batching? We could easily just link all the vmas into linked list and > > use a single call_rcu instead, no? This would both simplify the > > implementation, remove the scaling issue as well and we do not have to > > argue whether VM_AREA_FREE_LIST_MAX should be epsilon or epsilon + 1. > > Yes, I agree the solution is not stellar. I wanted something simple > but this is probably too simple. OTOH keeping all dead vm_area_structs > on the list without hooking up a shrinker (additional complexity) does > not sound too appealing either. I suspect you have missed my idea. I do not really want to keep the list around or any shrinker. It is dead simple. Collect all vmas in remove_vma and then call_rcu the whole list at once after the whole list (be it from exit_mmap or remove_mt). See? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs