From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1422846AbcBZRlP (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Feb 2016 12:41:15 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40860 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030230AbcBZRlM (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Feb 2016 12:41:12 -0500 Message-ID: <56D08E33.2080100@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 12:41:07 -0500 From: lwoodman@redhat.com Reply-To: lwoodman@redhat.com Organization: Red Hat User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hugh Dickins , Felix von Leitner CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: fork on processes with lots of memory References: <20160126160641.GA530@qarx.de> <20160126162853.GA1836@qarx.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------080009060704040005080706" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080009060704040005080706 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: email@kvack.org --------------080009060704040005080706 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; name="forkoff.c" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="forkoff.c" #include #include #include #include #include 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 #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