lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: introduce external memory hinting API
    On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 12:26:53AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
    > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 09:32:39AM -0800, Minchan Kim wrote:
    > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 06:58:37PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
    > > > 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?
    > >
    > > For example, memory ranges shared by several processes or critical for the
    > > latency, we could avoid those ranges to be cold/pageout to prevent
    > > unncecessary CPU burning/paging.
    >
    > Hmm.. I still don't see why any external entity has a better (or any)
    > knowledge about the matter. The process has to do this, no?

    I think Sandeep already gave enough information in other thread.

    >
    > > I also think people don't want to give an KSM hint to non-mergeable area.
    >
    > And how the manager knows which data is mergable?

    Oleksandr, could you say your thought why you need address range based
    API?

    >
    > If you are intimate enough with the process' internal state feel free to
    > inject syscall into the process with ptrace. Why bother with half-measures?

    Concern is we want to act the hint in caller's context, not calle because
    calle is usually very limited in cpuset/cgroups or even freezed state so
    they couldn't act by themselves quick enough, which makes many problems.
    One of efforts to solve the issue was "Expedited memory reclaim"

    https://lwn.net/Articles/785709/

    That could be also a good candidate for process_madvise API.

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2020-01-21 19:12    [W:5.298 / U:0.200 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site