lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v10 2/3] mm: add a field to store names for private anonymous memory
On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 09:21:42 -0700 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:

> > > > The name pointers are not shared between vmas even if they contain the
> > > > same name. The name pointer is stored in a union with fields that are
> > > > only used on file-backed mappings, so it does not increase memory usage.
> > > >
> > > > The patch is based on the original patch developed by Colin Cross, more
> > > > specifically on its latest version [1] posted upstream by Sumit Semwal.
> > > > It used a userspace pointer to store vma names. In that design, name
> > > > pointers could be shared between vmas. However during the last upstreaming
> > > > attempt, Kees Cook raised concerns [2] about this approach and suggested
> > > > to copy the name into kernel memory space, perform validity checks [3]
> > > > and store as a string referenced from vm_area_struct.
> > > > One big concern is about fork() performance which would need to strdup
> > > > anonymous vma names. Dave Hansen suggested experimenting with worst-case
> > > > scenario of forking a process with 64k vmas having longest possible names
> > > > [4]. I ran this experiment on an ARM64 Android device and recorded a
> > > > worst-case regression of almost 40% when forking such a process. This
> > > > regression is addressed in the followup patch which replaces the pointer
> > > > to a name with a refcounted structure that allows sharing the name pointer
> > > > between vmas of the same name. Instead of duplicating the string during
> > > > fork() or when splitting a vma it increments the refcount.
> > >
> > > Generally, the patch adds a bunch of code which a lot of users won't
> > > want. Did we bust a gut to reduce this impact? Was a standalone
> > > config setting considered?
> >
> > I didn't consider a standalone config for this feature because when
> > not used it has no memory impact at runtime. As for the image size, I
> > built Linus' ToT with and without this patchset with allmodconfig and

allnoconfig would be more interesting. People who want small kernels
won't be using allmodconfig!

> > the sizes are:
> > Without the patchset:
> > $ size vmlinux
> > text data bss dec hex filename
> > 40763556 58424519 29016228 128204303 7a43e0f vmlinux
> >
> > With the patchset:
> > $ size vmlinux
> > text data bss dec hex filename
> > 40765068 58424671 29016228 128205967 7a4448f vmlinux
> >
> > The increase seems quite small, so I'm not sure if it warrants a
> > separate config option.
>
> Andrew, do you still think we need a separate CONFIG option? I fixed
> the build issue when CONFIG_ADVISE_SYSCALLS=n and would like to post
> the update but if you want to have a separate config then I can post
> that together with the fix. Please let me know.

I don't see much downside to the standalone option. More complexity
for developers/testers, I guess. But such is life?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-10-07 04:40    [W:0.106 / U:0.544 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site