lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 1/8] mm: mmap: unmap large mapping by section
On Wed 21-03-18 05:31:19, Yang Shi wrote:
> When running some mmap/munmap scalability tests with large memory (i.e.
> > 300GB), the below hung task issue may happen occasionally.
>
> INFO: task ps:14018 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> Tainted: G E 4.9.79-009.ali3000.alios7.x86_64 #1
> "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this
> message.
> ps D 0 14018 1 0x00000004
> ffff885582f84000 ffff885e8682f000 ffff880972943000 ffff885ebf499bc0
> ffff8828ee120000 ffffc900349bfca8 ffffffff817154d0 0000000000000040
> 00ffffff812f872a ffff885ebf499bc0 024000d000948300 ffff880972943000
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff817154d0>] ? __schedule+0x250/0x730
> [<ffffffff817159e6>] schedule+0x36/0x80
> [<ffffffff81718560>] rwsem_down_read_failed+0xf0/0x150
> [<ffffffff81390a28>] call_rwsem_down_read_failed+0x18/0x30
> [<ffffffff81717db0>] down_read+0x20/0x40
> [<ffffffff812b9439>] proc_pid_cmdline_read+0xd9/0x4e0
> [<ffffffff81253c95>] ? do_filp_open+0xa5/0x100
> [<ffffffff81241d87>] __vfs_read+0x37/0x150
> [<ffffffff812f824b>] ? security_file_permission+0x9b/0xc0
> [<ffffffff81242266>] vfs_read+0x96/0x130
> [<ffffffff812437b5>] SyS_read+0x55/0xc0
> [<ffffffff8171a6da>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1a/0xc5
>
> It is because munmap holds mmap_sem from very beginning to all the way
> down to the end, and doesn't release it in the middle. When unmapping
> large mapping, it may take long time (take ~18 seconds to unmap 320GB
> mapping with every single page mapped on an idle machine).

Yes, this definitely sucks. One way to work that around is to split the
unmap to two phases. One to drop all the pages. That would only need
mmap_sem for read and then tear down the mapping with the mmap_sem for
write. This wouldn't help for parallel mmap_sem writers but those really
need a different approach (e.g. the range locking).

> Since unmapping does't require any atomicity, so here unmap large

How come? Could you be more specific why? Once you drop the lock the
address space might change under your feet and you might be unmapping a
completely different vma. That would require userspace doing nasty
things of course (e.g. MAP_FIXED) but I am worried that userspace really
depends on mmap/munmap atomicity these days.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-21 14:09    [W:1.203 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site