korg/linux
0
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git synced 2024-11-23 20:24:12 +08:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
fd37721803
linux/mm/shuffle.h

54 lines
1.2 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

mm: shuffle initial free memory to improve memory-side-cache utilization Patch series "mm: Randomize free memory", v10. This patch (of 3): Randomization of the page allocator improves the average utilization of a direct-mapped memory-side-cache. Memory side caching is a platform capability that Linux has been previously exposed to in HPC (high-performance computing) environments on specialty platforms. In that instance it was a smaller pool of high-bandwidth-memory relative to higher-capacity / lower-bandwidth DRAM. Now, this capability is going to be found on general purpose server platforms where DRAM is a cache in front of higher latency persistent memory [1]. Robert offered an explanation of the state of the art of Linux interactions with memory-side-caches [2], and I copy it here: It's been a problem in the HPC space: http://www.nersc.gov/research-and-development/knl-cache-mode-performance-coe/ A kernel module called zonesort is available to try to help: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/xeon-phi-software and this abandoned patch series proposed that for the kernel: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170823100205.17311-1-lukasz.daniluk@intel.com Dan's patch series doesn't attempt to ensure buffers won't conflict, but also reduces the chance that the buffers will. This will make performance more consistent, albeit slower than "optimal" (which is near impossible to attain in a general-purpose kernel). That's better than forcing users to deploy remedies like: "To eliminate this gradual degradation, we have added a Stream measurement to the Node Health Check that follows each job; nodes are rebooted whenever their measured memory bandwidth falls below 300 GB/s." A replacement for zonesort was merged upstream in commit cc9aec03e58f ("x86/numa_emulation: Introduce uniform split capability"). With this numa_emulation capability, memory can be split into cache sized ("near-memory" sized) numa nodes. A bind operation to such a node, and disabling workloads on other nodes, enables full cache performance. However, once the workload exceeds the cache size then cache conflicts are unavoidable. While HPC environments might be able to tolerate time-scheduling of cache sized workloads, for general purpose server platforms, the oversubscribed cache case will be the common case. The worst case scenario is that a server system owner benchmarks a workload at boot with an un-contended cache only to see that performance degrade over time, even below the average cache performance due to excessive conflicts. Randomization clips the peaks and fills in the valleys of cache utilization to yield steady average performance. Here are some performance impact details of the patches: 1/ An Intel internal synthetic memory bandwidth measurement tool, saw a 3X speedup in a contrived case that tries to force cache conflicts. The contrived cased used the numa_emulation capability to force an instance of the benchmark to be run in two of the near-memory sized numa nodes. If both instances were placed on the same emulated they would fit and cause zero conflicts. While on separate emulated nodes without randomization they underutilized the cache and conflicted unnecessarily due to the in-order allocation per node. 2/ A well known Java server application benchmark was run with a heap size that exceeded cache size by 3X. The cache conflict rate was 8% for the first run and degraded to 21% after page allocator aging. With randomization enabled the rate levelled out at 11%. 3/ A MongoDB workload did not observe measurable difference in cache-conflict rates, but the overall throughput dropped by 7% with randomization in one case. 4/ Mel Gorman ran his suite of performance workloads with randomization enabled on platforms without a memory-side-cache and saw a mix of some improvements and some losses [3]. While there is potentially significant improvement for applications that depend on low latency access across a wide working-set, the performance may be negligible to negative for other workloads. For this reason the shuffle capability defaults to off unless a direct-mapped memory-side-cache is detected. Even then, the page_alloc.shuffle=0 parameter can be specified to disable the randomization on those systems. Outside of memory-side-cache utilization concerns there is potentially security benefit from randomization. Some data exfiltration and return-oriented-programming attacks rely on the ability to infer the location of sensitive data objects. The kernel page allocator, especially early in system boot, has predictable first-in-first out behavior for physical pages. Pages are freed in physical address order when first onlined. Quoting Kees: "While we already have a base-address randomization (CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_MEMORY), attacks against the same hardware and memory layouts would certainly be using the predictability of allocation ordering (i.e. for attacks where the base address isn't important: only the relative positions between allocated memory). This is common in lots of heap-style attacks. They try to gain control over ordering by spraying allocations, etc. I'd really like to see this because it gives us something similar to CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM but for the page allocator." While SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM reduces the predictability of some local slab caches it leaves vast bulk of memory to be predictably in order allocated. However, it should be noted, the concrete security benefits are hard to quantify, and no known CVE is mitigated by this randomization. Introduce shuffle_free_memory(), and its helper shuffle_zone(), to perform a Fisher-Yates shuffle of the page allocator 'free_area' lists when they are initially populated with free memory at boot and at hotplug time. Do this based on either the presence of a page_alloc.shuffle=Y command line parameter, or autodetection of a memory-side-cache (to be added in a follow-on patch). The shuffling is done in terms of CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER sized free pages where the default CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER is MAX_ORDER-1 i.e. 10, 4MB this trades off randomization granularity for time spent shuffling. MAX_ORDER-1 was chosen to be minimally invasive to the page allocator while still showing memory-side cache behavior improvements, and the expectation that the security implications of finer granularity randomization is mitigated by CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM. The performance impact of the shuffling appears to be in the noise compared to other memory initialization work. This initial randomization can be undone over time so a follow-on patch is introduced to inject entropy on page free decisions. It is reasonable to ask if the page free entropy is sufficient, but it is not enough due to the in-order initial freeing of pages. At the start of that process putting page1 in front or behind page0 still keeps them close together, page2 is still near page1 and has a high chance of being adjacent. As more pages are added ordering diversity improves, but there is still high page locality for the low address pages and this leads to no significant impact to the cache conflict rate. [1]: https://itpeernetwork.intel.com/intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-operating-modes/ [2]: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/AT5PR8401MB1169D656C8B5E121752FC0F8AB120@AT5PR8401MB1169.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM [3]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/12/309 [dan.j.williams@intel.com: fix shuffle enable] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154943713038.3858443.4125180191382062871.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com [cai@lca.pw: fix SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR help texts] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190425201300.75650-1-cai@lca.pw Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154899811738.3165233.12325692939590944259.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2019-05-15 06:41:28 +08:00
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
// Copyright(c) 2018 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
#ifndef _MM_SHUFFLE_H
#define _MM_SHUFFLE_H
#include <linux/jump_label.h>
mm, treewide: redefine MAX_ORDER sanely MAX_ORDER currently defined as number of orders page allocator supports: user can ask buddy allocator for page order between 0 and MAX_ORDER-1. This definition is counter-intuitive and lead to number of bugs all over the kernel. Change the definition of MAX_ORDER to be inclusive: the range of orders user can ask from buddy allocator is 0..MAX_ORDER now. [kirill@shutemov.name: fix min() warning] Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230315153800.32wib3n5rickolvh@box [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix another min_t warning] [kirill@shutemov.name: fixups per Zi Yan] Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230316232144.b7ic4cif4kjiabws@box.shutemov.name [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix underlining in docs] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202303191025.VRCTk6mP-lkp@intel.com/ Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230315113133.11326-11-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> [powerpc] Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2023-03-15 19:31:33 +08:00
#define SHUFFLE_ORDER MAX_ORDER
mm: shuffle initial free memory to improve memory-side-cache utilization Patch series "mm: Randomize free memory", v10. This patch (of 3): Randomization of the page allocator improves the average utilization of a direct-mapped memory-side-cache. Memory side caching is a platform capability that Linux has been previously exposed to in HPC (high-performance computing) environments on specialty platforms. In that instance it was a smaller pool of high-bandwidth-memory relative to higher-capacity / lower-bandwidth DRAM. Now, this capability is going to be found on general purpose server platforms where DRAM is a cache in front of higher latency persistent memory [1]. Robert offered an explanation of the state of the art of Linux interactions with memory-side-caches [2], and I copy it here: It's been a problem in the HPC space: http://www.nersc.gov/research-and-development/knl-cache-mode-performance-coe/ A kernel module called zonesort is available to try to help: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/xeon-phi-software and this abandoned patch series proposed that for the kernel: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170823100205.17311-1-lukasz.daniluk@intel.com Dan's patch series doesn't attempt to ensure buffers won't conflict, but also reduces the chance that the buffers will. This will make performance more consistent, albeit slower than "optimal" (which is near impossible to attain in a general-purpose kernel). That's better than forcing users to deploy remedies like: "To eliminate this gradual degradation, we have added a Stream measurement to the Node Health Check that follows each job; nodes are rebooted whenever their measured memory bandwidth falls below 300 GB/s." A replacement for zonesort was merged upstream in commit cc9aec03e58f ("x86/numa_emulation: Introduce uniform split capability"). With this numa_emulation capability, memory can be split into cache sized ("near-memory" sized) numa nodes. A bind operation to such a node, and disabling workloads on other nodes, enables full cache performance. However, once the workload exceeds the cache size then cache conflicts are unavoidable. While HPC environments might be able to tolerate time-scheduling of cache sized workloads, for general purpose server platforms, the oversubscribed cache case will be the common case. The worst case scenario is that a server system owner benchmarks a workload at boot with an un-contended cache only to see that performance degrade over time, even below the average cache performance due to excessive conflicts. Randomization clips the peaks and fills in the valleys of cache utilization to yield steady average performance. Here are some performance impact details of the patches: 1/ An Intel internal synthetic memory bandwidth measurement tool, saw a 3X speedup in a contrived case that tries to force cache conflicts. The contrived cased used the numa_emulation capability to force an instance of the benchmark to be run in two of the near-memory sized numa nodes. If both instances were placed on the same emulated they would fit and cause zero conflicts. While on separate emulated nodes without randomization they underutilized the cache and conflicted unnecessarily due to the in-order allocation per node. 2/ A well known Java server application benchmark was run with a heap size that exceeded cache size by 3X. The cache conflict rate was 8% for the first run and degraded to 21% after page allocator aging. With randomization enabled the rate levelled out at 11%. 3/ A MongoDB workload did not observe measurable difference in cache-conflict rates, but the overall throughput dropped by 7% with randomization in one case. 4/ Mel Gorman ran his suite of performance workloads with randomization enabled on platforms without a memory-side-cache and saw a mix of some improvements and some losses [3]. While there is potentially significant improvement for applications that depend on low latency access across a wide working-set, the performance may be negligible to negative for other workloads. For this reason the shuffle capability defaults to off unless a direct-mapped memory-side-cache is detected. Even then, the page_alloc.shuffle=0 parameter can be specified to disable the randomization on those systems. Outside of memory-side-cache utilization concerns there is potentially security benefit from randomization. Some data exfiltration and return-oriented-programming attacks rely on the ability to infer the location of sensitive data objects. The kernel page allocator, especially early in system boot, has predictable first-in-first out behavior for physical pages. Pages are freed in physical address order when first onlined. Quoting Kees: "While we already have a base-address randomization (CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_MEMORY), attacks against the same hardware and memory layouts would certainly be using the predictability of allocation ordering (i.e. for attacks where the base address isn't important: only the relative positions between allocated memory). This is common in lots of heap-style attacks. They try to gain control over ordering by spraying allocations, etc. I'd really like to see this because it gives us something similar to CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM but for the page allocator." While SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM reduces the predictability of some local slab caches it leaves vast bulk of memory to be predictably in order allocated. However, it should be noted, the concrete security benefits are hard to quantify, and no known CVE is mitigated by this randomization. Introduce shuffle_free_memory(), and its helper shuffle_zone(), to perform a Fisher-Yates shuffle of the page allocator 'free_area' lists when they are initially populated with free memory at boot and at hotplug time. Do this based on either the presence of a page_alloc.shuffle=Y command line parameter, or autodetection of a memory-side-cache (to be added in a follow-on patch). The shuffling is done in terms of CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER sized free pages where the default CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER is MAX_ORDER-1 i.e. 10, 4MB this trades off randomization granularity for time spent shuffling. MAX_ORDER-1 was chosen to be minimally invasive to the page allocator while still showing memory-side cache behavior improvements, and the expectation that the security implications of finer granularity randomization is mitigated by CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM. The performance impact of the shuffling appears to be in the noise compared to other memory initialization work. This initial randomization can be undone over time so a follow-on patch is introduced to inject entropy on page free decisions. It is reasonable to ask if the page free entropy is sufficient, but it is not enough due to the in-order initial freeing of pages. At the start of that process putting page1 in front or behind page0 still keeps them close together, page2 is still near page1 and has a high chance of being adjacent. As more pages are added ordering diversity improves, but there is still high page locality for the low address pages and this leads to no significant impact to the cache conflict rate. [1]: https://itpeernetwork.intel.com/intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-operating-modes/ [2]: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/AT5PR8401MB1169D656C8B5E121752FC0F8AB120@AT5PR8401MB1169.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM [3]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/12/309 [dan.j.williams@intel.com: fix shuffle enable] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154943713038.3858443.4125180191382062871.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com [cai@lca.pw: fix SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR help texts] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190425201300.75650-1-cai@lca.pw Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154899811738.3165233.12325692939590944259.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2019-05-15 06:41:28 +08:00
#ifdef CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR
DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(page_alloc_shuffle_key);
extern void __shuffle_free_memory(pg_data_t *pgdat);
mm: adjust shuffle code to allow for future coalescing Patch series "mm / virtio: Provide support for free page reporting", v17. This series provides an asynchronous means of reporting free guest pages to a hypervisor so that the memory associated with those pages can be dropped and reused by other processes and/or guests on the host. Using this it is possible to avoid unnecessary I/O to disk and greatly improve performance in the case of memory overcommit on the host. When enabled we will be performing a scan of free memory every 2 seconds while pages of sufficiently high order are being freed. In each pass at least one sixteenth of each free list will be reported. By doing this we avoid racing against other threads that may be causing a high amount of memory churn. The lowest page order currently scanned when reporting pages is pageblock_order so that this feature will not interfere with the use of Transparent Huge Pages in the case of virtualization. Currently this is only in use by virtio-balloon however there is the hope that at some point in the future other hypervisors might be able to make use of it. In the virtio-balloon/QEMU implementation the hypervisor is currently using MADV_DONTNEED to indicate to the host kernel that the page is currently free. It will be zeroed and faulted back into the guest the next time the page is accessed. To track if a page is reported or not the Uptodate flag was repurposed and used as a Reported flag for Buddy pages. We walk though the free list isolating pages and adding them to the scatterlist until we either encounter the end of the list or have processed at least one sixteenth of the pages that were listed in nr_free prior to us starting. If we fill the scatterlist before we reach the end of the list we rotate the list so that the first unreported page we encounter is moved to the head of the list as that is where we will resume after we have freed the reported pages back into the tail of the list. Below are the results from various benchmarks. I primarily focused on two tests. The first is the will-it-scale/page_fault2 test, and the other is a modified version of will-it-scale/page_fault1 that was enabled to use THP. I did this as it allows for better visibility into different parts of the memory subsystem. The guest is running with 32G for RAM on one node of a E5-2630 v3. The host has had some features such as CPU turbo disabled in the BIOS. Test page_fault1 (THP) page_fault2 Name tasks Process Iter STDEV Process Iter STDEV Baseline 1 1012402.50 0.14% 361855.25 0.81% 16 8827457.25 0.09% 3282347.00 0.34% Patches Applied 1 1007897.00 0.23% 361887.00 0.26% 16 8784741.75 0.39% 3240669.25 0.48% Patches Enabled 1 1010227.50 0.39% 359749.25 0.56% 16 8756219.00 0.24% 3226608.75 0.97% Patches Enabled 1 1050982.00 4.26% 357966.25 0.14% page shuffle 16 8672601.25 0.49% 3223177.75 0.40% Patches enabled 1 1003238.00 0.22% 360211.00 0.22% shuffle w/ RFC 16 8767010.50 0.32% 3199874.00 0.71% The results above are for a baseline with a linux-next-20191219 kernel, that kernel with this patch set applied but page reporting disabled in virtio-balloon, the patches applied and page reporting fully enabled, the patches enabled with page shuffling enabled, and the patches applied with page shuffling enabled and an RFC patch that makes used of MADV_FREE in QEMU. These results include the deviation seen between the average value reported here versus the high and/or low value. I observed that during the test memory usage for the first three tests never dropped whereas with the patches fully enabled the VM would drop to using only a few GB of the host's memory when switching from memhog to page fault tests. Any of the overhead visible with this patch set enabled seems due to page faults caused by accessing the reported pages and the host zeroing the page before giving it back to the guest. This overhead is much more visible when using THP than with standard 4K pages. In addition page shuffling seemed to increase the amount of faults generated due to an increase in memory churn. The overehad is reduced when using MADV_FREE as we can avoid the extra zeroing of the pages when they are reintroduced to the host, as can be seen when the RFC is applied with shuffling enabled. The overall guest size is kept fairly small to only a few GB while the test is running. If the host memory were oversubscribed this patch set should result in a performance improvement as swapping memory in the host can be avoided. A brief history on the background of free page reporting can be found at: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/29f43d5796feed0dec8e8bb98b187d9dac03b900.camel@linux.intel.com/ This patch (of 9): Move the head/tail adding logic out of the shuffle code and into the __free_one_page function since ultimately that is where it is really needed anyway. By doing this we should be able to reduce the overhead and can consolidate all of the list addition bits in one spot. Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com> Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@redhat.com> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Cc: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> Cc: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> Cc: wei qi <weiqi4@huawei.com> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200211224602.29318.84523.stgit@localhost.localdomain Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2020-04-07 11:04:45 +08:00
extern bool shuffle_pick_tail(void);
mm/shuffle: fix section mismatch warning clang sometimes decides not to inline shuffle_zone(), but it calls a __meminit function. Without the extra __meminit annotation we get this warning: WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x2a86d4): Section mismatch in reference from the function shuffle_zone() to the function .meminit.text:__shuffle_zone() The function shuffle_zone() references the function __meminit __shuffle_zone(). This is often because shuffle_zone lacks a __meminit annotation or the annotation of __shuffle_zone is wrong. shuffle_free_memory() did not show the same problem in my tests, but it could happen in theory as well, so mark both as __meminit. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210514135952.2928094-1-arnd@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2021-05-23 08:41:43 +08:00
static inline void __meminit shuffle_free_memory(pg_data_t *pgdat)
mm: shuffle initial free memory to improve memory-side-cache utilization Patch series "mm: Randomize free memory", v10. This patch (of 3): Randomization of the page allocator improves the average utilization of a direct-mapped memory-side-cache. Memory side caching is a platform capability that Linux has been previously exposed to in HPC (high-performance computing) environments on specialty platforms. In that instance it was a smaller pool of high-bandwidth-memory relative to higher-capacity / lower-bandwidth DRAM. Now, this capability is going to be found on general purpose server platforms where DRAM is a cache in front of higher latency persistent memory [1]. Robert offered an explanation of the state of the art of Linux interactions with memory-side-caches [2], and I copy it here: It's been a problem in the HPC space: http://www.nersc.gov/research-and-development/knl-cache-mode-performance-coe/ A kernel module called zonesort is available to try to help: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/xeon-phi-software and this abandoned patch series proposed that for the kernel: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170823100205.17311-1-lukasz.daniluk@intel.com Dan's patch series doesn't attempt to ensure buffers won't conflict, but also reduces the chance that the buffers will. This will make performance more consistent, albeit slower than "optimal" (which is near impossible to attain in a general-purpose kernel). That's better than forcing users to deploy remedies like: "To eliminate this gradual degradation, we have added a Stream measurement to the Node Health Check that follows each job; nodes are rebooted whenever their measured memory bandwidth falls below 300 GB/s." A replacement for zonesort was merged upstream in commit cc9aec03e58f ("x86/numa_emulation: Introduce uniform split capability"). With this numa_emulation capability, memory can be split into cache sized ("near-memory" sized) numa nodes. A bind operation to such a node, and disabling workloads on other nodes, enables full cache performance. However, once the workload exceeds the cache size then cache conflicts are unavoidable. While HPC environments might be able to tolerate time-scheduling of cache sized workloads, for general purpose server platforms, the oversubscribed cache case will be the common case. The worst case scenario is that a server system owner benchmarks a workload at boot with an un-contended cache only to see that performance degrade over time, even below the average cache performance due to excessive conflicts. Randomization clips the peaks and fills in the valleys of cache utilization to yield steady average performance. Here are some performance impact details of the patches: 1/ An Intel internal synthetic memory bandwidth measurement tool, saw a 3X speedup in a contrived case that tries to force cache conflicts. The contrived cased used the numa_emulation capability to force an instance of the benchmark to be run in two of the near-memory sized numa nodes. If both instances were placed on the same emulated they would fit and cause zero conflicts. While on separate emulated nodes without randomization they underutilized the cache and conflicted unnecessarily due to the in-order allocation per node. 2/ A well known Java server application benchmark was run with a heap size that exceeded cache size by 3X. The cache conflict rate was 8% for the first run and degraded to 21% after page allocator aging. With randomization enabled the rate levelled out at 11%. 3/ A MongoDB workload did not observe measurable difference in cache-conflict rates, but the overall throughput dropped by 7% with randomization in one case. 4/ Mel Gorman ran his suite of performance workloads with randomization enabled on platforms without a memory-side-cache and saw a mix of some improvements and some losses [3]. While there is potentially significant improvement for applications that depend on low latency access across a wide working-set, the performance may be negligible to negative for other workloads. For this reason the shuffle capability defaults to off unless a direct-mapped memory-side-cache is detected. Even then, the page_alloc.shuffle=0 parameter can be specified to disable the randomization on those systems. Outside of memory-side-cache utilization concerns there is potentially security benefit from randomization. Some data exfiltration and return-oriented-programming attacks rely on the ability to infer the location of sensitive data objects. The kernel page allocator, especially early in system boot, has predictable first-in-first out behavior for physical pages. Pages are freed in physical address order when first onlined. Quoting Kees: "While we already have a base-address randomization (CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_MEMORY), attacks against the same hardware and memory layouts would certainly be using the predictability of allocation ordering (i.e. for attacks where the base address isn't important: only the relative positions between allocated memory). This is common in lots of heap-style attacks. They try to gain control over ordering by spraying allocations, etc. I'd really like to see this because it gives us something similar to CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM but for the page allocator." While SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM reduces the predictability of some local slab caches it leaves vast bulk of memory to be predictably in order allocated. However, it should be noted, the concrete security benefits are hard to quantify, and no known CVE is mitigated by this randomization. Introduce shuffle_free_memory(), and its helper shuffle_zone(), to perform a Fisher-Yates shuffle of the page allocator 'free_area' lists when they are initially populated with free memory at boot and at hotplug time. Do this based on either the presence of a page_alloc.shuffle=Y command line parameter, or autodetection of a memory-side-cache (to be added in a follow-on patch). The shuffling is done in terms of CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER sized free pages where the default CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER is MAX_ORDER-1 i.e. 10, 4MB this trades off randomization granularity for time spent shuffling. MAX_ORDER-1 was chosen to be minimally invasive to the page allocator while still showing memory-side cache behavior improvements, and the expectation that the security implications of finer granularity randomization is mitigated by CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM. The performance impact of the shuffling appears to be in the noise compared to other memory initialization work. This initial randomization can be undone over time so a follow-on patch is introduced to inject entropy on page free decisions. It is reasonable to ask if the page free entropy is sufficient, but it is not enough due to the in-order initial freeing of pages. At the start of that process putting page1 in front or behind page0 still keeps them close together, page2 is still near page1 and has a high chance of being adjacent. As more pages are added ordering diversity improves, but there is still high page locality for the low address pages and this leads to no significant impact to the cache conflict rate. [1]: https://itpeernetwork.intel.com/intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-operating-modes/ [2]: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/AT5PR8401MB1169D656C8B5E121752FC0F8AB120@AT5PR8401MB1169.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM [3]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/12/309 [dan.j.williams@intel.com: fix shuffle enable] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154943713038.3858443.4125180191382062871.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com [cai@lca.pw: fix SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR help texts] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190425201300.75650-1-cai@lca.pw Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154899811738.3165233.12325692939590944259.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2019-05-15 06:41:28 +08:00
{
if (!static_branch_unlikely(&page_alloc_shuffle_key))
return;
__shuffle_free_memory(pgdat);
}
extern void __shuffle_zone(struct zone *z);
mm/shuffle: fix section mismatch warning clang sometimes decides not to inline shuffle_zone(), but it calls a __meminit function. Without the extra __meminit annotation we get this warning: WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x2a86d4): Section mismatch in reference from the function shuffle_zone() to the function .meminit.text:__shuffle_zone() The function shuffle_zone() references the function __meminit __shuffle_zone(). This is often because shuffle_zone lacks a __meminit annotation or the annotation of __shuffle_zone is wrong. shuffle_free_memory() did not show the same problem in my tests, but it could happen in theory as well, so mark both as __meminit. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210514135952.2928094-1-arnd@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2021-05-23 08:41:43 +08:00
static inline void __meminit shuffle_zone(struct zone *z)
mm: shuffle initial free memory to improve memory-side-cache utilization Patch series "mm: Randomize free memory", v10. This patch (of 3): Randomization of the page allocator improves the average utilization of a direct-mapped memory-side-cache. Memory side caching is a platform capability that Linux has been previously exposed to in HPC (high-performance computing) environments on specialty platforms. In that instance it was a smaller pool of high-bandwidth-memory relative to higher-capacity / lower-bandwidth DRAM. Now, this capability is going to be found on general purpose server platforms where DRAM is a cache in front of higher latency persistent memory [1]. Robert offered an explanation of the state of the art of Linux interactions with memory-side-caches [2], and I copy it here: It's been a problem in the HPC space: http://www.nersc.gov/research-and-development/knl-cache-mode-performance-coe/ A kernel module called zonesort is available to try to help: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/xeon-phi-software and this abandoned patch series proposed that for the kernel: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170823100205.17311-1-lukasz.daniluk@intel.com Dan's patch series doesn't attempt to ensure buffers won't conflict, but also reduces the chance that the buffers will. This will make performance more consistent, albeit slower than "optimal" (which is near impossible to attain in a general-purpose kernel). That's better than forcing users to deploy remedies like: "To eliminate this gradual degradation, we have added a Stream measurement to the Node Health Check that follows each job; nodes are rebooted whenever their measured memory bandwidth falls below 300 GB/s." A replacement for zonesort was merged upstream in commit cc9aec03e58f ("x86/numa_emulation: Introduce uniform split capability"). With this numa_emulation capability, memory can be split into cache sized ("near-memory" sized) numa nodes. A bind operation to such a node, and disabling workloads on other nodes, enables full cache performance. However, once the workload exceeds the cache size then cache conflicts are unavoidable. While HPC environments might be able to tolerate time-scheduling of cache sized workloads, for general purpose server platforms, the oversubscribed cache case will be the common case. The worst case scenario is that a server system owner benchmarks a workload at boot with an un-contended cache only to see that performance degrade over time, even below the average cache performance due to excessive conflicts. Randomization clips the peaks and fills in the valleys of cache utilization to yield steady average performance. Here are some performance impact details of the patches: 1/ An Intel internal synthetic memory bandwidth measurement tool, saw a 3X speedup in a contrived case that tries to force cache conflicts. The contrived cased used the numa_emulation capability to force an instance of the benchmark to be run in two of the near-memory sized numa nodes. If both instances were placed on the same emulated they would fit and cause zero conflicts. While on separate emulated nodes without randomization they underutilized the cache and conflicted unnecessarily due to the in-order allocation per node. 2/ A well known Java server application benchmark was run with a heap size that exceeded cache size by 3X. The cache conflict rate was 8% for the first run and degraded to 21% after page allocator aging. With randomization enabled the rate levelled out at 11%. 3/ A MongoDB workload did not observe measurable difference in cache-conflict rates, but the overall throughput dropped by 7% with randomization in one case. 4/ Mel Gorman ran his suite of performance workloads with randomization enabled on platforms without a memory-side-cache and saw a mix of some improvements and some losses [3]. While there is potentially significant improvement for applications that depend on low latency access across a wide working-set, the performance may be negligible to negative for other workloads. For this reason the shuffle capability defaults to off unless a direct-mapped memory-side-cache is detected. Even then, the page_alloc.shuffle=0 parameter can be specified to disable the randomization on those systems. Outside of memory-side-cache utilization concerns there is potentially security benefit from randomization. Some data exfiltration and return-oriented-programming attacks rely on the ability to infer the location of sensitive data objects. The kernel page allocator, especially early in system boot, has predictable first-in-first out behavior for physical pages. Pages are freed in physical address order when first onlined. Quoting Kees: "While we already have a base-address randomization (CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_MEMORY), attacks against the same hardware and memory layouts would certainly be using the predictability of allocation ordering (i.e. for attacks where the base address isn't important: only the relative positions between allocated memory). This is common in lots of heap-style attacks. They try to gain control over ordering by spraying allocations, etc. I'd really like to see this because it gives us something similar to CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM but for the page allocator." While SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM reduces the predictability of some local slab caches it leaves vast bulk of memory to be predictably in order allocated. However, it should be noted, the concrete security benefits are hard to quantify, and no known CVE is mitigated by this randomization. Introduce shuffle_free_memory(), and its helper shuffle_zone(), to perform a Fisher-Yates shuffle of the page allocator 'free_area' lists when they are initially populated with free memory at boot and at hotplug time. Do this based on either the presence of a page_alloc.shuffle=Y command line parameter, or autodetection of a memory-side-cache (to be added in a follow-on patch). The shuffling is done in terms of CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER sized free pages where the default CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER is MAX_ORDER-1 i.e. 10, 4MB this trades off randomization granularity for time spent shuffling. MAX_ORDER-1 was chosen to be minimally invasive to the page allocator while still showing memory-side cache behavior improvements, and the expectation that the security implications of finer granularity randomization is mitigated by CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM. The performance impact of the shuffling appears to be in the noise compared to other memory initialization work. This initial randomization can be undone over time so a follow-on patch is introduced to inject entropy on page free decisions. It is reasonable to ask if the page free entropy is sufficient, but it is not enough due to the in-order initial freeing of pages. At the start of that process putting page1 in front or behind page0 still keeps them close together, page2 is still near page1 and has a high chance of being adjacent. As more pages are added ordering diversity improves, but there is still high page locality for the low address pages and this leads to no significant impact to the cache conflict rate. [1]: https://itpeernetwork.intel.com/intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-operating-modes/ [2]: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/AT5PR8401MB1169D656C8B5E121752FC0F8AB120@AT5PR8401MB1169.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM [3]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/12/309 [dan.j.williams@intel.com: fix shuffle enable] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154943713038.3858443.4125180191382062871.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com [cai@lca.pw: fix SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR help texts] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190425201300.75650-1-cai@lca.pw Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154899811738.3165233.12325692939590944259.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2019-05-15 06:41:28 +08:00
{
if (!static_branch_unlikely(&page_alloc_shuffle_key))
return;
__shuffle_zone(z);
}
mm: maintain randomization of page free lists When freeing a page with an order >= shuffle_page_order randomly select the front or back of the list for insertion. While the mm tries to defragment physical pages into huge pages this can tend to make the page allocator more predictable over time. Inject the front-back randomness to preserve the initial randomness established by shuffle_free_memory() when the kernel was booted. The overhead of this manipulation is constrained by only being applied for MAX_ORDER sized pages by default. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154899812788.3165233.9066631950746578517.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2019-05-15 06:41:35 +08:00
static inline bool is_shuffle_order(int order)
{
if (!static_branch_unlikely(&page_alloc_shuffle_key))
return false;
return order >= SHUFFLE_ORDER;
}
mm: shuffle initial free memory to improve memory-side-cache utilization Patch series "mm: Randomize free memory", v10. This patch (of 3): Randomization of the page allocator improves the average utilization of a direct-mapped memory-side-cache. Memory side caching is a platform capability that Linux has been previously exposed to in HPC (high-performance computing) environments on specialty platforms. In that instance it was a smaller pool of high-bandwidth-memory relative to higher-capacity / lower-bandwidth DRAM. Now, this capability is going to be found on general purpose server platforms where DRAM is a cache in front of higher latency persistent memory [1]. Robert offered an explanation of the state of the art of Linux interactions with memory-side-caches [2], and I copy it here: It's been a problem in the HPC space: http://www.nersc.gov/research-and-development/knl-cache-mode-performance-coe/ A kernel module called zonesort is available to try to help: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/xeon-phi-software and this abandoned patch series proposed that for the kernel: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170823100205.17311-1-lukasz.daniluk@intel.com Dan's patch series doesn't attempt to ensure buffers won't conflict, but also reduces the chance that the buffers will. This will make performance more consistent, albeit slower than "optimal" (which is near impossible to attain in a general-purpose kernel). That's better than forcing users to deploy remedies like: "To eliminate this gradual degradation, we have added a Stream measurement to the Node Health Check that follows each job; nodes are rebooted whenever their measured memory bandwidth falls below 300 GB/s." A replacement for zonesort was merged upstream in commit cc9aec03e58f ("x86/numa_emulation: Introduce uniform split capability"). With this numa_emulation capability, memory can be split into cache sized ("near-memory" sized) numa nodes. A bind operation to such a node, and disabling workloads on other nodes, enables full cache performance. However, once the workload exceeds the cache size then cache conflicts are unavoidable. While HPC environments might be able to tolerate time-scheduling of cache sized workloads, for general purpose server platforms, the oversubscribed cache case will be the common case. The worst case scenario is that a server system owner benchmarks a workload at boot with an un-contended cache only to see that performance degrade over time, even below the average cache performance due to excessive conflicts. Randomization clips the peaks and fills in the valleys of cache utilization to yield steady average performance. Here are some performance impact details of the patches: 1/ An Intel internal synthetic memory bandwidth measurement tool, saw a 3X speedup in a contrived case that tries to force cache conflicts. The contrived cased used the numa_emulation capability to force an instance of the benchmark to be run in two of the near-memory sized numa nodes. If both instances were placed on the same emulated they would fit and cause zero conflicts. While on separate emulated nodes without randomization they underutilized the cache and conflicted unnecessarily due to the in-order allocation per node. 2/ A well known Java server application benchmark was run with a heap size that exceeded cache size by 3X. The cache conflict rate was 8% for the first run and degraded to 21% after page allocator aging. With randomization enabled the rate levelled out at 11%. 3/ A MongoDB workload did not observe measurable difference in cache-conflict rates, but the overall throughput dropped by 7% with randomization in one case. 4/ Mel Gorman ran his suite of performance workloads with randomization enabled on platforms without a memory-side-cache and saw a mix of some improvements and some losses [3]. While there is potentially significant improvement for applications that depend on low latency access across a wide working-set, the performance may be negligible to negative for other workloads. For this reason the shuffle capability defaults to off unless a direct-mapped memory-side-cache is detected. Even then, the page_alloc.shuffle=0 parameter can be specified to disable the randomization on those systems. Outside of memory-side-cache utilization concerns there is potentially security benefit from randomization. Some data exfiltration and return-oriented-programming attacks rely on the ability to infer the location of sensitive data objects. The kernel page allocator, especially early in system boot, has predictable first-in-first out behavior for physical pages. Pages are freed in physical address order when first onlined. Quoting Kees: "While we already have a base-address randomization (CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_MEMORY), attacks against the same hardware and memory layouts would certainly be using the predictability of allocation ordering (i.e. for attacks where the base address isn't important: only the relative positions between allocated memory). This is common in lots of heap-style attacks. They try to gain control over ordering by spraying allocations, etc. I'd really like to see this because it gives us something similar to CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM but for the page allocator." While SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM reduces the predictability of some local slab caches it leaves vast bulk of memory to be predictably in order allocated. However, it should be noted, the concrete security benefits are hard to quantify, and no known CVE is mitigated by this randomization. Introduce shuffle_free_memory(), and its helper shuffle_zone(), to perform a Fisher-Yates shuffle of the page allocator 'free_area' lists when they are initially populated with free memory at boot and at hotplug time. Do this based on either the presence of a page_alloc.shuffle=Y command line parameter, or autodetection of a memory-side-cache (to be added in a follow-on patch). The shuffling is done in terms of CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER sized free pages where the default CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER is MAX_ORDER-1 i.e. 10, 4MB this trades off randomization granularity for time spent shuffling. MAX_ORDER-1 was chosen to be minimally invasive to the page allocator while still showing memory-side cache behavior improvements, and the expectation that the security implications of finer granularity randomization is mitigated by CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM. The performance impact of the shuffling appears to be in the noise compared to other memory initialization work. This initial randomization can be undone over time so a follow-on patch is introduced to inject entropy on page free decisions. It is reasonable to ask if the page free entropy is sufficient, but it is not enough due to the in-order initial freeing of pages. At the start of that process putting page1 in front or behind page0 still keeps them close together, page2 is still near page1 and has a high chance of being adjacent. As more pages are added ordering diversity improves, but there is still high page locality for the low address pages and this leads to no significant impact to the cache conflict rate. [1]: https://itpeernetwork.intel.com/intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-operating-modes/ [2]: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/AT5PR8401MB1169D656C8B5E121752FC0F8AB120@AT5PR8401MB1169.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM [3]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/12/309 [dan.j.williams@intel.com: fix shuffle enable] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154943713038.3858443.4125180191382062871.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com [cai@lca.pw: fix SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR help texts] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190425201300.75650-1-cai@lca.pw Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154899811738.3165233.12325692939590944259.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2019-05-15 06:41:28 +08:00
#else
mm: adjust shuffle code to allow for future coalescing Patch series "mm / virtio: Provide support for free page reporting", v17. This series provides an asynchronous means of reporting free guest pages to a hypervisor so that the memory associated with those pages can be dropped and reused by other processes and/or guests on the host. Using this it is possible to avoid unnecessary I/O to disk and greatly improve performance in the case of memory overcommit on the host. When enabled we will be performing a scan of free memory every 2 seconds while pages of sufficiently high order are being freed. In each pass at least one sixteenth of each free list will be reported. By doing this we avoid racing against other threads that may be causing a high amount of memory churn. The lowest page order currently scanned when reporting pages is pageblock_order so that this feature will not interfere with the use of Transparent Huge Pages in the case of virtualization. Currently this is only in use by virtio-balloon however there is the hope that at some point in the future other hypervisors might be able to make use of it. In the virtio-balloon/QEMU implementation the hypervisor is currently using MADV_DONTNEED to indicate to the host kernel that the page is currently free. It will be zeroed and faulted back into the guest the next time the page is accessed. To track if a page is reported or not the Uptodate flag was repurposed and used as a Reported flag for Buddy pages. We walk though the free list isolating pages and adding them to the scatterlist until we either encounter the end of the list or have processed at least one sixteenth of the pages that were listed in nr_free prior to us starting. If we fill the scatterlist before we reach the end of the list we rotate the list so that the first unreported page we encounter is moved to the head of the list as that is where we will resume after we have freed the reported pages back into the tail of the list. Below are the results from various benchmarks. I primarily focused on two tests. The first is the will-it-scale/page_fault2 test, and the other is a modified version of will-it-scale/page_fault1 that was enabled to use THP. I did this as it allows for better visibility into different parts of the memory subsystem. The guest is running with 32G for RAM on one node of a E5-2630 v3. The host has had some features such as CPU turbo disabled in the BIOS. Test page_fault1 (THP) page_fault2 Name tasks Process Iter STDEV Process Iter STDEV Baseline 1 1012402.50 0.14% 361855.25 0.81% 16 8827457.25 0.09% 3282347.00 0.34% Patches Applied 1 1007897.00 0.23% 361887.00 0.26% 16 8784741.75 0.39% 3240669.25 0.48% Patches Enabled 1 1010227.50 0.39% 359749.25 0.56% 16 8756219.00 0.24% 3226608.75 0.97% Patches Enabled 1 1050982.00 4.26% 357966.25 0.14% page shuffle 16 8672601.25 0.49% 3223177.75 0.40% Patches enabled 1 1003238.00 0.22% 360211.00 0.22% shuffle w/ RFC 16 8767010.50 0.32% 3199874.00 0.71% The results above are for a baseline with a linux-next-20191219 kernel, that kernel with this patch set applied but page reporting disabled in virtio-balloon, the patches applied and page reporting fully enabled, the patches enabled with page shuffling enabled, and the patches applied with page shuffling enabled and an RFC patch that makes used of MADV_FREE in QEMU. These results include the deviation seen between the average value reported here versus the high and/or low value. I observed that during the test memory usage for the first three tests never dropped whereas with the patches fully enabled the VM would drop to using only a few GB of the host's memory when switching from memhog to page fault tests. Any of the overhead visible with this patch set enabled seems due to page faults caused by accessing the reported pages and the host zeroing the page before giving it back to the guest. This overhead is much more visible when using THP than with standard 4K pages. In addition page shuffling seemed to increase the amount of faults generated due to an increase in memory churn. The overehad is reduced when using MADV_FREE as we can avoid the extra zeroing of the pages when they are reintroduced to the host, as can be seen when the RFC is applied with shuffling enabled. The overall guest size is kept fairly small to only a few GB while the test is running. If the host memory were oversubscribed this patch set should result in a performance improvement as swapping memory in the host can be avoided. A brief history on the background of free page reporting can be found at: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/29f43d5796feed0dec8e8bb98b187d9dac03b900.camel@linux.intel.com/ This patch (of 9): Move the head/tail adding logic out of the shuffle code and into the __free_one_page function since ultimately that is where it is really needed anyway. By doing this we should be able to reduce the overhead and can consolidate all of the list addition bits in one spot. Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> Cc: Yang Zhang <yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com> Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@redhat.com> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Cc: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> Cc: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> Cc: wei qi <weiqi4@huawei.com> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200211224602.29318.84523.stgit@localhost.localdomain Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2020-04-07 11:04:45 +08:00
static inline bool shuffle_pick_tail(void)
{
return false;
}
mm: shuffle initial free memory to improve memory-side-cache utilization Patch series "mm: Randomize free memory", v10. This patch (of 3): Randomization of the page allocator improves the average utilization of a direct-mapped memory-side-cache. Memory side caching is a platform capability that Linux has been previously exposed to in HPC (high-performance computing) environments on specialty platforms. In that instance it was a smaller pool of high-bandwidth-memory relative to higher-capacity / lower-bandwidth DRAM. Now, this capability is going to be found on general purpose server platforms where DRAM is a cache in front of higher latency persistent memory [1]. Robert offered an explanation of the state of the art of Linux interactions with memory-side-caches [2], and I copy it here: It's been a problem in the HPC space: http://www.nersc.gov/research-and-development/knl-cache-mode-performance-coe/ A kernel module called zonesort is available to try to help: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/xeon-phi-software and this abandoned patch series proposed that for the kernel: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170823100205.17311-1-lukasz.daniluk@intel.com Dan's patch series doesn't attempt to ensure buffers won't conflict, but also reduces the chance that the buffers will. This will make performance more consistent, albeit slower than "optimal" (which is near impossible to attain in a general-purpose kernel). That's better than forcing users to deploy remedies like: "To eliminate this gradual degradation, we have added a Stream measurement to the Node Health Check that follows each job; nodes are rebooted whenever their measured memory bandwidth falls below 300 GB/s." A replacement for zonesort was merged upstream in commit cc9aec03e58f ("x86/numa_emulation: Introduce uniform split capability"). With this numa_emulation capability, memory can be split into cache sized ("near-memory" sized) numa nodes. A bind operation to such a node, and disabling workloads on other nodes, enables full cache performance. However, once the workload exceeds the cache size then cache conflicts are unavoidable. While HPC environments might be able to tolerate time-scheduling of cache sized workloads, for general purpose server platforms, the oversubscribed cache case will be the common case. The worst case scenario is that a server system owner benchmarks a workload at boot with an un-contended cache only to see that performance degrade over time, even below the average cache performance due to excessive conflicts. Randomization clips the peaks and fills in the valleys of cache utilization to yield steady average performance. Here are some performance impact details of the patches: 1/ An Intel internal synthetic memory bandwidth measurement tool, saw a 3X speedup in a contrived case that tries to force cache conflicts. The contrived cased used the numa_emulation capability to force an instance of the benchmark to be run in two of the near-memory sized numa nodes. If both instances were placed on the same emulated they would fit and cause zero conflicts. While on separate emulated nodes without randomization they underutilized the cache and conflicted unnecessarily due to the in-order allocation per node. 2/ A well known Java server application benchmark was run with a heap size that exceeded cache size by 3X. The cache conflict rate was 8% for the first run and degraded to 21% after page allocator aging. With randomization enabled the rate levelled out at 11%. 3/ A MongoDB workload did not observe measurable difference in cache-conflict rates, but the overall throughput dropped by 7% with randomization in one case. 4/ Mel Gorman ran his suite of performance workloads with randomization enabled on platforms without a memory-side-cache and saw a mix of some improvements and some losses [3]. While there is potentially significant improvement for applications that depend on low latency access across a wide working-set, the performance may be negligible to negative for other workloads. For this reason the shuffle capability defaults to off unless a direct-mapped memory-side-cache is detected. Even then, the page_alloc.shuffle=0 parameter can be specified to disable the randomization on those systems. Outside of memory-side-cache utilization concerns there is potentially security benefit from randomization. Some data exfiltration and return-oriented-programming attacks rely on the ability to infer the location of sensitive data objects. The kernel page allocator, especially early in system boot, has predictable first-in-first out behavior for physical pages. Pages are freed in physical address order when first onlined. Quoting Kees: "While we already have a base-address randomization (CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_MEMORY), attacks against the same hardware and memory layouts would certainly be using the predictability of allocation ordering (i.e. for attacks where the base address isn't important: only the relative positions between allocated memory). This is common in lots of heap-style attacks. They try to gain control over ordering by spraying allocations, etc. I'd really like to see this because it gives us something similar to CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM but for the page allocator." While SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM reduces the predictability of some local slab caches it leaves vast bulk of memory to be predictably in order allocated. However, it should be noted, the concrete security benefits are hard to quantify, and no known CVE is mitigated by this randomization. Introduce shuffle_free_memory(), and its helper shuffle_zone(), to perform a Fisher-Yates shuffle of the page allocator 'free_area' lists when they are initially populated with free memory at boot and at hotplug time. Do this based on either the presence of a page_alloc.shuffle=Y command line parameter, or autodetection of a memory-side-cache (to be added in a follow-on patch). The shuffling is done in terms of CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER sized free pages where the default CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER is MAX_ORDER-1 i.e. 10, 4MB this trades off randomization granularity for time spent shuffling. MAX_ORDER-1 was chosen to be minimally invasive to the page allocator while still showing memory-side cache behavior improvements, and the expectation that the security implications of finer granularity randomization is mitigated by CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM. The performance impact of the shuffling appears to be in the noise compared to other memory initialization work. This initial randomization can be undone over time so a follow-on patch is introduced to inject entropy on page free decisions. It is reasonable to ask if the page free entropy is sufficient, but it is not enough due to the in-order initial freeing of pages. At the start of that process putting page1 in front or behind page0 still keeps them close together, page2 is still near page1 and has a high chance of being adjacent. As more pages are added ordering diversity improves, but there is still high page locality for the low address pages and this leads to no significant impact to the cache conflict rate. [1]: https://itpeernetwork.intel.com/intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-operating-modes/ [2]: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/AT5PR8401MB1169D656C8B5E121752FC0F8AB120@AT5PR8401MB1169.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM [3]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/12/309 [dan.j.williams@intel.com: fix shuffle enable] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154943713038.3858443.4125180191382062871.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com [cai@lca.pw: fix SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR help texts] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190425201300.75650-1-cai@lca.pw Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154899811738.3165233.12325692939590944259.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2019-05-15 06:41:28 +08:00
static inline void shuffle_free_memory(pg_data_t *pgdat)
{
}
static inline void shuffle_zone(struct zone *z)
{
}
mm: maintain randomization of page free lists When freeing a page with an order >= shuffle_page_order randomly select the front or back of the list for insertion. While the mm tries to defragment physical pages into huge pages this can tend to make the page allocator more predictable over time. Inject the front-back randomness to preserve the initial randomness established by shuffle_free_memory() when the kernel was booted. The overhead of this manipulation is constrained by only being applied for MAX_ORDER sized pages by default. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154899812788.3165233.9066631950746578517.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2019-05-15 06:41:35 +08:00
static inline bool is_shuffle_order(int order)
{
return false;
}
mm: shuffle initial free memory to improve memory-side-cache utilization Patch series "mm: Randomize free memory", v10. This patch (of 3): Randomization of the page allocator improves the average utilization of a direct-mapped memory-side-cache. Memory side caching is a platform capability that Linux has been previously exposed to in HPC (high-performance computing) environments on specialty platforms. In that instance it was a smaller pool of high-bandwidth-memory relative to higher-capacity / lower-bandwidth DRAM. Now, this capability is going to be found on general purpose server platforms where DRAM is a cache in front of higher latency persistent memory [1]. Robert offered an explanation of the state of the art of Linux interactions with memory-side-caches [2], and I copy it here: It's been a problem in the HPC space: http://www.nersc.gov/research-and-development/knl-cache-mode-performance-coe/ A kernel module called zonesort is available to try to help: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/xeon-phi-software and this abandoned patch series proposed that for the kernel: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170823100205.17311-1-lukasz.daniluk@intel.com Dan's patch series doesn't attempt to ensure buffers won't conflict, but also reduces the chance that the buffers will. This will make performance more consistent, albeit slower than "optimal" (which is near impossible to attain in a general-purpose kernel). That's better than forcing users to deploy remedies like: "To eliminate this gradual degradation, we have added a Stream measurement to the Node Health Check that follows each job; nodes are rebooted whenever their measured memory bandwidth falls below 300 GB/s." A replacement for zonesort was merged upstream in commit cc9aec03e58f ("x86/numa_emulation: Introduce uniform split capability"). With this numa_emulation capability, memory can be split into cache sized ("near-memory" sized) numa nodes. A bind operation to such a node, and disabling workloads on other nodes, enables full cache performance. However, once the workload exceeds the cache size then cache conflicts are unavoidable. While HPC environments might be able to tolerate time-scheduling of cache sized workloads, for general purpose server platforms, the oversubscribed cache case will be the common case. The worst case scenario is that a server system owner benchmarks a workload at boot with an un-contended cache only to see that performance degrade over time, even below the average cache performance due to excessive conflicts. Randomization clips the peaks and fills in the valleys of cache utilization to yield steady average performance. Here are some performance impact details of the patches: 1/ An Intel internal synthetic memory bandwidth measurement tool, saw a 3X speedup in a contrived case that tries to force cache conflicts. The contrived cased used the numa_emulation capability to force an instance of the benchmark to be run in two of the near-memory sized numa nodes. If both instances were placed on the same emulated they would fit and cause zero conflicts. While on separate emulated nodes without randomization they underutilized the cache and conflicted unnecessarily due to the in-order allocation per node. 2/ A well known Java server application benchmark was run with a heap size that exceeded cache size by 3X. The cache conflict rate was 8% for the first run and degraded to 21% after page allocator aging. With randomization enabled the rate levelled out at 11%. 3/ A MongoDB workload did not observe measurable difference in cache-conflict rates, but the overall throughput dropped by 7% with randomization in one case. 4/ Mel Gorman ran his suite of performance workloads with randomization enabled on platforms without a memory-side-cache and saw a mix of some improvements and some losses [3]. While there is potentially significant improvement for applications that depend on low latency access across a wide working-set, the performance may be negligible to negative for other workloads. For this reason the shuffle capability defaults to off unless a direct-mapped memory-side-cache is detected. Even then, the page_alloc.shuffle=0 parameter can be specified to disable the randomization on those systems. Outside of memory-side-cache utilization concerns there is potentially security benefit from randomization. Some data exfiltration and return-oriented-programming attacks rely on the ability to infer the location of sensitive data objects. The kernel page allocator, especially early in system boot, has predictable first-in-first out behavior for physical pages. Pages are freed in physical address order when first onlined. Quoting Kees: "While we already have a base-address randomization (CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_MEMORY), attacks against the same hardware and memory layouts would certainly be using the predictability of allocation ordering (i.e. for attacks where the base address isn't important: only the relative positions between allocated memory). This is common in lots of heap-style attacks. They try to gain control over ordering by spraying allocations, etc. I'd really like to see this because it gives us something similar to CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM but for the page allocator." While SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM reduces the predictability of some local slab caches it leaves vast bulk of memory to be predictably in order allocated. However, it should be noted, the concrete security benefits are hard to quantify, and no known CVE is mitigated by this randomization. Introduce shuffle_free_memory(), and its helper shuffle_zone(), to perform a Fisher-Yates shuffle of the page allocator 'free_area' lists when they are initially populated with free memory at boot and at hotplug time. Do this based on either the presence of a page_alloc.shuffle=Y command line parameter, or autodetection of a memory-side-cache (to be added in a follow-on patch). The shuffling is done in terms of CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER sized free pages where the default CONFIG_SHUFFLE_PAGE_ORDER is MAX_ORDER-1 i.e. 10, 4MB this trades off randomization granularity for time spent shuffling. MAX_ORDER-1 was chosen to be minimally invasive to the page allocator while still showing memory-side cache behavior improvements, and the expectation that the security implications of finer granularity randomization is mitigated by CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM. The performance impact of the shuffling appears to be in the noise compared to other memory initialization work. This initial randomization can be undone over time so a follow-on patch is introduced to inject entropy on page free decisions. It is reasonable to ask if the page free entropy is sufficient, but it is not enough due to the in-order initial freeing of pages. At the start of that process putting page1 in front or behind page0 still keeps them close together, page2 is still near page1 and has a high chance of being adjacent. As more pages are added ordering diversity improves, but there is still high page locality for the low address pages and this leads to no significant impact to the cache conflict rate. [1]: https://itpeernetwork.intel.com/intel-optane-dc-persistent-memory-operating-modes/ [2]: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/AT5PR8401MB1169D656C8B5E121752FC0F8AB120@AT5PR8401MB1169.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM [3]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/12/309 [dan.j.williams@intel.com: fix shuffle enable] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154943713038.3858443.4125180191382062871.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com [cai@lca.pw: fix SHUFFLE_PAGE_ALLOCATOR help texts] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190425201300.75650-1-cai@lca.pw Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/154899811738.3165233.12325692939590944259.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> Cc: Robert Elliott <elliott@hpe.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2019-05-15 06:41:28 +08:00
#endif
#endif /* _MM_SHUFFLE_H */
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink