From: lwoodman@redhat.com
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Felix von Leitner <felix-linuxkernel@fefe.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: fork on processes with lots of memory
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 12:41:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56D08E33.2080100@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1601271905210.2349@eggly.anvils>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2623 bytes --]
On 01/27/2016 10:09 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Felix von Leitner wrote:
>>> Dear Linux kernel devs,
>>> I talked to someone who uses large Linux based hardware to run a
>>> process with huge memory requirements (think 4 GB), and he told me that
>>> if they do a fork() syscall on that process, the whole system comes to
>>> standstill. And not just for a second or two. He said they measured a 45
>>> minute (!) delay before the system became responsive again.
>> I'm sorry, I meant 4 TB not 4 GB.
>> I'm not used to working with that kind of memory sizes.
>>
>>> Their working theory is that all the pages need to be marked copy-on-write
>>> in both processes, and if you touch one page, a copy needs to be made,
>>> and than just takes a while if you have a billion pages.
>>> I was wondering if there is any advice for such situations from the
>>> memory management people on this list.
>>> In this case the fork was for an execve afterwards, but I was going to
>>> recommend fork to them for something else that can not be tricked around
>>> with vfork.
>>> Can anyone comment on whether the 45 minute number sounds like it could
>>> be real? When I heard it, I was flabberghasted. But the other person
>>> swore it was real. Can a fork cause this much of a delay? Is there a way
>>> to work around it?
>>> I was going to recommend the fork to create a boundary between the
>>> processes, so that you can recover from memory corruption in one
>>> process. In fact, after the fork I would want to munmap almost all of
>>> the shared pages anyway, but there is no way to tell fork that.
> You might find madvise(addr, length, MADV_DONTFORK) helpful:
> that tells fork not to duplicate the given range in the child.
>
> Hugh
I dont know exactly what program they are running but we test RHEL with
up to 24TB
of memory and have not seen this problem. I have mmap()'d 12TB of
memory into a
parent process private, touched every page then forked a child which
wrote to every
page thereby incurring tons of ZFOD and COW faults. It takes a while to
process the
6 billion faults but the system didnt come to a halt. The time I do see
significant pauses
is when we overcommit RAM and swap space and get into an OOMkill storm.
Attached is the program:
>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Felix
>>> PS: Please put me on Cc if you reply, I'm not subscribed to this mailing
>>> list.
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
[-- Attachment #2: forkoff.c --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1401 bytes --]
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <stdio.h>
main(int argc,char *argv[])
{
unsigned long siz, procs, itterations, cow;
char *ptr1;
char *i;
int pid, j, k, status;
if ((argc <= 1)||(argc >4)) {
printf("bad args, usage: forkoff <memsize-in-GB> #children #itterations cow:0|1\n");
exit(-1);
}
siz = ((long)atol(argv[1])*1024*1024*1024);
procs = atol(argv[2]);
itterations = atol(argv[3]);
cow = atol(argv[4]);
printf("mmaping %ld anonymous bytes\n", siz);
ptr1 = (char *)mmap((void *)0,siz,PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE,MAP_ANONYMOUS|MAP_PRIVATE,-1,0);
if (ptr1 == (char *)-1) {
printf("ptr1 = %lx\n", ptr1);
perror("");
}
if (cow) {
printf("priming parent for child COW faults\n");
// This will cause the ZFOD faults in the parent & COW faults in the children.
for (i=ptr1; i<ptr1+siz-1; i+=4096)
*i=(char)'i';
}
printf("forking %ld processes\n", procs);
k = procs;
do{
pid = fork();
if (pid == -1) {
printf("fork failure\n");
exit(-1);
} else if (!pid) {
printf("PID %d touching %d pages\n", getpid(), siz/4096);
// This will ZFOD fault if the parent didnt otherwise it will COW fault.
for (j=0; j<itterations; j++) {
for (i=ptr1; i<ptr1+siz-1; i+=4096) {
*i=(char)'i';
}
}
printf("All done, exiting\n");
exit(0);
}
} while(--k);
while (procs-- && wait(&status));
}
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-26 17:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20160126160641.GA530@qarx.de>
[not found] ` <20160126162853.GA1836@qarx.de>
2016-01-26 16:38 ` fork on processes with lots of memory Borislav Petkov
2016-01-28 3:09 ` Hugh Dickins
2016-02-26 17:41 ` lwoodman [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56D08E33.2080100@redhat.com \
--to=lwoodman@redhat.com \
--cc=felix-linuxkernel@fefe.de \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).