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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB029C2D0E4 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BF892222F for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="AJ2VewNY" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726337AbgKLTIo (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 14:08:44 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:54958 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726096AbgKLTIo (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 14:08:44 -0500 Received: from kernel.org (unknown [77.125.7.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8D5220B80; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1605208123; bh=xV//yxXQnSWrF+/xUfBz0sg6IFqo/YMvvh+jTSmycog=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=AJ2VewNYER4w3booQ/KucmJAPZK4Nm1reG5FJeJdC37e1oDo0gYmUR751y+nFk/Fk KTZnkXVxvIaPUC+PE+K9dv1EbVW82mMGVB67vT5tdx3BmBSmhgCrAaqtZp5v8kMCfS p3TcAbQ8jXyADENOO6QdpyUsgBOodjaN9MdE79nU= Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 21:08:27 +0200 From: Mike Rapoport To: David Hildenbrand Cc: Andrew Morton , Alexander Viro , Andy Lutomirski , Arnd Bergmann , Borislav Petkov , Catalin Marinas , Christopher Lameter , Dan Williams , Dave Hansen , Elena Reshetova , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , James Bottomley , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Matthew Wilcox , Mark Rutland , Mike Rapoport , Michael Kerrisk , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , Peter Zijlstra , Rick Edgecombe , Shuah Khan , Thomas Gleixner , Tycho Andersen , Will Deacon , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/9] mmap: make mlock_future_check() global Message-ID: <20201112190827.GP4758@kernel.org> References: <20201110151444.20662-1-rppt@kernel.org> <20201110151444.20662-3-rppt@kernel.org> <9e2fafd7-abb0-aa79-fa66-cd8662307446@redhat.com> <20201110180648.GB4758@kernel.org> <3194b507-a85f-965a-e0eb-512a79ede6a9@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3194b507-a85f-965a-e0eb-512a79ede6a9@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:22:00PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 10.11.20 19:06, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 06:17:26PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > On 10.11.20 16:14, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > From: Mike Rapoport > > > > > > > > It will be used by the upcoming secret memory implementation. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport > > > > --- > > > > mm/internal.h | 3 +++ > > > > mm/mmap.c | 5 ++--- > > > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h > > > > index c43ccdddb0f6..ae146a260b14 100644 > > > > --- a/mm/internal.h > > > > +++ b/mm/internal.h > > > > @@ -348,6 +348,9 @@ static inline void munlock_vma_pages_all(struct vm_area_struct *vma) > > > > extern void mlock_vma_page(struct page *page); > > > > extern unsigned int munlock_vma_page(struct page *page); > > > > +extern int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > > > > + unsigned long len); > > > > + > > > > /* > > > > * Clear the page's PageMlocked(). This can be useful in a situation where > > > > * we want to unconditionally remove a page from the pagecache -- e.g., > > > > diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c > > > > index 61f72b09d990..c481f088bd50 100644 > > > > --- a/mm/mmap.c > > > > +++ b/mm/mmap.c > > > > @@ -1348,9 +1348,8 @@ static inline unsigned long round_hint_to_min(unsigned long hint) > > > > return hint; > > > > } > > > > -static inline int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, > > > > - unsigned long flags, > > > > - unsigned long len) > > > > +int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > > > > + unsigned long len) > > > > { > > > > unsigned long locked, lock_limit; > > > > > > > > > > So, an interesting question is if you actually want to charge secretmem > > > pages against mlock now, or if you want a dedicated secretmem cgroup > > > controller instead? > > > > Well, with the current implementation there are three limits an > > administrator can use to control secretmem limits: mlock, memcg and > > kernel parameter. > > > > The kernel parameter puts a global upper limit for secretmem usage, > > memcg accounts all secretmem allocations, including the unused memory in > > large pages caching and mlock allows per task limit for secretmem > > mappings, well, like mlock does. > > > > I didn't consider a dedicated cgroup, as it seems we already have enough > > existing knobs and a new one would be unnecessary. > > To me it feels like the mlock() limit is a wrong fit for secretmem. But > maybe there are other cases of using the mlock() limit without actually > doing mlock() that I am not aware of (most probably :) )? Secretmem does not explicitly calls to mlock() but it does what mlock() does and a bit more. Citing mlock(2): mlock(), mlock2(), and mlockall() lock part or all of the calling process's virtual address space into RAM, preventing that memory from being paged to the swap area. So, based on that secretmem pages are not swappable, I think that RLIMIT_MEMLOCK is appropriate here. > I mean, my concern is not earth shattering, this can be reworked later. As I > said, it just feels wrong. > > -- > Thanks, > > David / dhildenb > -- Sincerely yours, Mike. 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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F061C55ABD for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83D0D216C4 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="AJ2VewNY" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 83D0D216C4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Received: from ml01.vlan13.01.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C02F100EC1DA; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 11:08:45 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=198.145.29.99; helo=mail.kernel.org; envelope-from=rppt@kernel.org; receiver= Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B84A100EC1C4 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 11:08:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from kernel.org (unknown [77.125.7.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8D5220B80; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1605208123; bh=xV//yxXQnSWrF+/xUfBz0sg6IFqo/YMvvh+jTSmycog=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=AJ2VewNYER4w3booQ/KucmJAPZK4Nm1reG5FJeJdC37e1oDo0gYmUR751y+nFk/Fk KTZnkXVxvIaPUC+PE+K9dv1EbVW82mMGVB67vT5tdx3BmBSmhgCrAaqtZp5v8kMCfS p3TcAbQ8jXyADENOO6QdpyUsgBOodjaN9MdE79nU= Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 21:08:27 +0200 From: Mike Rapoport To: David Hildenbrand Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/9] mmap: make mlock_future_check() global Message-ID: <20201112190827.GP4758@kernel.org> References: <20201110151444.20662-1-rppt@kernel.org> <20201110151444.20662-3-rppt@kernel.org> <9e2fafd7-abb0-aa79-fa66-cd8662307446@redhat.com> <20201110180648.GB4758@kernel.org> <3194b507-a85f-965a-e0eb-512a79ede6a9@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3194b507-a85f-965a-e0eb-512a79ede6a9@redhat.com> Message-ID-Hash: LK6R4GLJANS3H6EUN74PONGPJHVJ4QXR X-Message-ID-Hash: LK6R4GLJANS3H6EUN74PONGPJHVJ4QXR X-MailFrom: rppt@kernel.org X-Mailman-Rule-Hits: nonmember-moderation X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation CC: Andrew Morton , Alexander Viro , Andy Lutomirski , Arnd Bergmann , Borislav Petkov , Catalin Marinas , Christopher Lameter , Dave Hansen , Elena Reshetova , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , James Bottomley , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Matthew Wilcox , Mark Rutland , Mike Rapoport , Michael Kerrisk , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , Peter Zijlstra , Rick Edgecombe , Shuah Khan , Thomas Gleixner , Tycho Andersen , Will Deacon , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.ker nel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:22:00PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 10.11.20 19:06, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 06:17:26PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > On 10.11.20 16:14, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > From: Mike Rapoport > > > > > > > > It will be used by the upcoming secret memory implementation. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport > > > > --- > > > > mm/internal.h | 3 +++ > > > > mm/mmap.c | 5 ++--- > > > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h > > > > index c43ccdddb0f6..ae146a260b14 100644 > > > > --- a/mm/internal.h > > > > +++ b/mm/internal.h > > > > @@ -348,6 +348,9 @@ static inline void munlock_vma_pages_all(struct vm_area_struct *vma) > > > > extern void mlock_vma_page(struct page *page); > > > > extern unsigned int munlock_vma_page(struct page *page); > > > > +extern int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > > > > + unsigned long len); > > > > + > > > > /* > > > > * Clear the page's PageMlocked(). This can be useful in a situation where > > > > * we want to unconditionally remove a page from the pagecache -- e.g., > > > > diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c > > > > index 61f72b09d990..c481f088bd50 100644 > > > > --- a/mm/mmap.c > > > > +++ b/mm/mmap.c > > > > @@ -1348,9 +1348,8 @@ static inline unsigned long round_hint_to_min(unsigned long hint) > > > > return hint; > > > > } > > > > -static inline int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, > > > > - unsigned long flags, > > > > - unsigned long len) > > > > +int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > > > > + unsigned long len) > > > > { > > > > unsigned long locked, lock_limit; > > > > > > > > > > So, an interesting question is if you actually want to charge secretmem > > > pages against mlock now, or if you want a dedicated secretmem cgroup > > > controller instead? > > > > Well, with the current implementation there are three limits an > > administrator can use to control secretmem limits: mlock, memcg and > > kernel parameter. > > > > The kernel parameter puts a global upper limit for secretmem usage, > > memcg accounts all secretmem allocations, including the unused memory in > > large pages caching and mlock allows per task limit for secretmem > > mappings, well, like mlock does. > > > > I didn't consider a dedicated cgroup, as it seems we already have enough > > existing knobs and a new one would be unnecessary. > > To me it feels like the mlock() limit is a wrong fit for secretmem. But > maybe there are other cases of using the mlock() limit without actually > doing mlock() that I am not aware of (most probably :) )? Secretmem does not explicitly calls to mlock() but it does what mlock() does and a bit more. Citing mlock(2): mlock(), mlock2(), and mlockall() lock part or all of the calling process's virtual address space into RAM, preventing that memory from being paged to the swap area. So, based on that secretmem pages are not swappable, I think that RLIMIT_MEMLOCK is appropriate here. > I mean, my concern is not earth shattering, this can be reworked later. As I > said, it just feels wrong. > > -- > Thanks, > > David / dhildenb > -- Sincerely yours, Mike. _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org 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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E24C2D0E4 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C075520B80 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="IJqpl5/W"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="AJ2VewNY" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C075520B80 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=wkULhrTPi0Zqt+3+t1KNav2wPspgVTp9WR3aN9y7eMc=; b=IJqpl5/WJ/dIptIzWF3S7ZBjL 7e7BeMRUmng9JFy2r013wyLR1I/KyuneWQAz2QrCrR30wGZW3p5tvpr6ajBfCDWeOf/HX8EqV4c+3 Q3YmDIjqx+dvMxdXgtzOqCAn8/LvwpisrD4Hz8oHrpbjdUi5K3tVJ6+edUjrDWsYQ7UuqGZTDKz2F a6rD9jXz+adMNf8H5pM519bAvamzXzSLC83G/lAW0VDFQZGcOsVCPeavF2oCjX4Ip6GWpCXE1dR4Z OmrCK7MqOxmxv/BalXZW3UU74BWTiBsEYjvoiuhytmyczd3uo3nc5tEsD1HRntSjoJvy1Db00xEHD 3RRVXlimw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kdHxj-0007Ac-3u; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:51 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kdHxc-00077p-F6; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:45 +0000 Received: from kernel.org (unknown [77.125.7.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8D5220B80; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1605208123; bh=xV//yxXQnSWrF+/xUfBz0sg6IFqo/YMvvh+jTSmycog=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=AJ2VewNYER4w3booQ/KucmJAPZK4Nm1reG5FJeJdC37e1oDo0gYmUR751y+nFk/Fk KTZnkXVxvIaPUC+PE+K9dv1EbVW82mMGVB67vT5tdx3BmBSmhgCrAaqtZp5v8kMCfS p3TcAbQ8jXyADENOO6QdpyUsgBOodjaN9MdE79nU= Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 21:08:27 +0200 From: Mike Rapoport To: David Hildenbrand Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/9] mmap: make mlock_future_check() global Message-ID: <20201112190827.GP4758@kernel.org> References: <20201110151444.20662-1-rppt@kernel.org> <20201110151444.20662-3-rppt@kernel.org> <9e2fafd7-abb0-aa79-fa66-cd8662307446@redhat.com> <20201110180648.GB4758@kernel.org> <3194b507-a85f-965a-e0eb-512a79ede6a9@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3194b507-a85f-965a-e0eb-512a79ede6a9@redhat.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201112_140844_776284_C3621092 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 34.82 ) X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Peter Zijlstra , Catalin Marinas , Dave Hansen , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Christopher Lameter , Shuah Khan , Thomas Gleixner , Elena Reshetova , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Tycho Andersen , linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, Will Deacon , x86@kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox , Mike Rapoport , Ingo Molnar , Michael Kerrisk , Arnd Bergmann , James Bottomley , Borislav Petkov , Alexander Viro , Andy Lutomirski , Paul Walmsley , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Dan Williams , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Palmer Dabbelt , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Rick Edgecombe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-riscv" Errors-To: linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:22:00PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 10.11.20 19:06, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 06:17:26PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > On 10.11.20 16:14, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > From: Mike Rapoport > > > > > > > > It will be used by the upcoming secret memory implementation. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport > > > > --- > > > > mm/internal.h | 3 +++ > > > > mm/mmap.c | 5 ++--- > > > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h > > > > index c43ccdddb0f6..ae146a260b14 100644 > > > > --- a/mm/internal.h > > > > +++ b/mm/internal.h > > > > @@ -348,6 +348,9 @@ static inline void munlock_vma_pages_all(struct vm_area_struct *vma) > > > > extern void mlock_vma_page(struct page *page); > > > > extern unsigned int munlock_vma_page(struct page *page); > > > > +extern int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > > > > + unsigned long len); > > > > + > > > > /* > > > > * Clear the page's PageMlocked(). This can be useful in a situation where > > > > * we want to unconditionally remove a page from the pagecache -- e.g., > > > > diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c > > > > index 61f72b09d990..c481f088bd50 100644 > > > > --- a/mm/mmap.c > > > > +++ b/mm/mmap.c > > > > @@ -1348,9 +1348,8 @@ static inline unsigned long round_hint_to_min(unsigned long hint) > > > > return hint; > > > > } > > > > -static inline int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, > > > > - unsigned long flags, > > > > - unsigned long len) > > > > +int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > > > > + unsigned long len) > > > > { > > > > unsigned long locked, lock_limit; > > > > > > > > > > So, an interesting question is if you actually want to charge secretmem > > > pages against mlock now, or if you want a dedicated secretmem cgroup > > > controller instead? > > > > Well, with the current implementation there are three limits an > > administrator can use to control secretmem limits: mlock, memcg and > > kernel parameter. > > > > The kernel parameter puts a global upper limit for secretmem usage, > > memcg accounts all secretmem allocations, including the unused memory in > > large pages caching and mlock allows per task limit for secretmem > > mappings, well, like mlock does. > > > > I didn't consider a dedicated cgroup, as it seems we already have enough > > existing knobs and a new one would be unnecessary. > > To me it feels like the mlock() limit is a wrong fit for secretmem. But > maybe there are other cases of using the mlock() limit without actually > doing mlock() that I am not aware of (most probably :) )? Secretmem does not explicitly calls to mlock() but it does what mlock() does and a bit more. Citing mlock(2): mlock(), mlock2(), and mlockall() lock part or all of the calling process's virtual address space into RAM, preventing that memory from being paged to the swap area. So, based on that secretmem pages are not swappable, I think that RLIMIT_MEMLOCK is appropriate here. > I mean, my concern is not earth shattering, this can be reworked later. As I > said, it just feels wrong. > > -- > Thanks, > > David / dhildenb > -- Sincerely yours, Mike. _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv 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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A53FAC5519F for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:09:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 235DD20B80 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:09:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="PfVQVEuD"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="AJ2VewNY" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 235DD20B80 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=f3C/sii4tLTheTHOA3o0rI3/yD8wiKwRHBLaSxLtLFY=; b=PfVQVEuDzgw6MJqZMv+QNjoYo WQGaGVR5j25qqpPWfibb3Mjcdy2wHjk0kFoaCVvy6HTR7ptt+pAnptlOI/ID2bB0XIkwUKUY+fREP FmQbNdQ7FLfF6qQZtN7/JhFsVAJGVkqArbpBtgSqDZXu048kTvXVL0B0QoVAZNaKqGX8/NTCoGsNU LUAJeiFDExqyEdOMqjHgsnEZuPcYYqV82d6f8hFyKUJgq5ltuXStAzBE0QoaWfXjFNni1KIqn7XWY YsO8CovKoKH5b4WbF3erRuJY8RB1jaVoFpYvnKlSng3BXLdVLBMGC4qUgaSvE9nO1vC5urfh5bQeN qjItYCB7g==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kdHxg-00079j-Ex; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:48 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kdHxc-00077p-F6; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:45 +0000 Received: from kernel.org (unknown [77.125.7.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8D5220B80; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:08:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1605208123; bh=xV//yxXQnSWrF+/xUfBz0sg6IFqo/YMvvh+jTSmycog=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=AJ2VewNYER4w3booQ/KucmJAPZK4Nm1reG5FJeJdC37e1oDo0gYmUR751y+nFk/Fk KTZnkXVxvIaPUC+PE+K9dv1EbVW82mMGVB67vT5tdx3BmBSmhgCrAaqtZp5v8kMCfS p3TcAbQ8jXyADENOO6QdpyUsgBOodjaN9MdE79nU= Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 21:08:27 +0200 From: Mike Rapoport To: David Hildenbrand Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/9] mmap: make mlock_future_check() global Message-ID: <20201112190827.GP4758@kernel.org> References: <20201110151444.20662-1-rppt@kernel.org> <20201110151444.20662-3-rppt@kernel.org> <9e2fafd7-abb0-aa79-fa66-cd8662307446@redhat.com> <20201110180648.GB4758@kernel.org> <3194b507-a85f-965a-e0eb-512a79ede6a9@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3194b507-a85f-965a-e0eb-512a79ede6a9@redhat.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201112_140844_776284_C3621092 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 34.82 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Peter Zijlstra , Catalin Marinas , Dave Hansen , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Christopher Lameter , Shuah Khan , Thomas Gleixner , Elena Reshetova , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Tycho Andersen , linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, Will Deacon , x86@kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox , Mike Rapoport , Ingo Molnar , Michael Kerrisk , Arnd Bergmann , James Bottomley , Borislav Petkov , Alexander Viro , Andy Lutomirski , Paul Walmsley , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Dan Williams , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Palmer Dabbelt , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Rick Edgecombe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 05:22:00PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 10.11.20 19:06, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 06:17:26PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > On 10.11.20 16:14, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > From: Mike Rapoport > > > > > > > > It will be used by the upcoming secret memory implementation. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport > > > > --- > > > > mm/internal.h | 3 +++ > > > > mm/mmap.c | 5 ++--- > > > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h > > > > index c43ccdddb0f6..ae146a260b14 100644 > > > > --- a/mm/internal.h > > > > +++ b/mm/internal.h > > > > @@ -348,6 +348,9 @@ static inline void munlock_vma_pages_all(struct vm_area_struct *vma) > > > > extern void mlock_vma_page(struct page *page); > > > > extern unsigned int munlock_vma_page(struct page *page); > > > > +extern int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > > > > + unsigned long len); > > > > + > > > > /* > > > > * Clear the page's PageMlocked(). This can be useful in a situation where > > > > * we want to unconditionally remove a page from the pagecache -- e.g., > > > > diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c > > > > index 61f72b09d990..c481f088bd50 100644 > > > > --- a/mm/mmap.c > > > > +++ b/mm/mmap.c > > > > @@ -1348,9 +1348,8 @@ static inline unsigned long round_hint_to_min(unsigned long hint) > > > > return hint; > > > > } > > > > -static inline int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, > > > > - unsigned long flags, > > > > - unsigned long len) > > > > +int mlock_future_check(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long flags, > > > > + unsigned long len) > > > > { > > > > unsigned long locked, lock_limit; > > > > > > > > > > So, an interesting question is if you actually want to charge secretmem > > > pages against mlock now, or if you want a dedicated secretmem cgroup > > > controller instead? > > > > Well, with the current implementation there are three limits an > > administrator can use to control secretmem limits: mlock, memcg and > > kernel parameter. > > > > The kernel parameter puts a global upper limit for secretmem usage, > > memcg accounts all secretmem allocations, including the unused memory in > > large pages caching and mlock allows per task limit for secretmem > > mappings, well, like mlock does. > > > > I didn't consider a dedicated cgroup, as it seems we already have enough > > existing knobs and a new one would be unnecessary. > > To me it feels like the mlock() limit is a wrong fit for secretmem. But > maybe there are other cases of using the mlock() limit without actually > doing mlock() that I am not aware of (most probably :) )? Secretmem does not explicitly calls to mlock() but it does what mlock() does and a bit more. Citing mlock(2): mlock(), mlock2(), and mlockall() lock part or all of the calling process's virtual address space into RAM, preventing that memory from being paged to the swap area. So, based on that secretmem pages are not swappable, I think that RLIMIT_MEMLOCK is appropriate here. > I mean, my concern is not earth shattering, this can be reworked later. As I > said, it just feels wrong. > > -- > Thanks, > > David / dhildenb > -- Sincerely yours, Mike. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel