From: Guillaume Morin <guillaume@morinfr.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Guillaume Morin <guillaume@morinfr.org>,
oleg@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] uprobe: support for private hugetlb mappings
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 22:53:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZibOQI9kwzE98n12@bender.morinfr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <22fcde31-16c4-42d0-ad99-568173ec4dd0@redhat.com>
On 22 Apr 20:59, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > The benefit - to me - is very clear. People do use hugetlb mappings to
> > run code in production environments. The perf benefits are there for some
> > workloads. Intel has published a whitepaper about it etc.
> > Uprobes are a very good tool to do live tracing. If you can restart the
> > process and reproduce, you should be able to disable hugetlb remapping
> > but if you need to look at a live process, there are not many options.
> > Not being able to use uprobes is crippling.
>
> Please add all that as motivation to the patch description or cover letter.
>
> > > Yes, libhugetlbfs exists. But why do we have to support uprobes with it?
> > > Nobody cared until now, why care now?
> >
> > I think you could ask the same question for every new feature patch :)
>
> I have to, because it usually indicates a lack of motivation in the
> cover-letter/patch description :P
My cover letter was indeed lacking. I will make sure to add this kind of
details next time.
> > Since the removal a few releases ago of the __morecore() hook in glibc,
> > the main feature of libhugetlbfs is ELF segments remapping. I think
> > there are definitely a lot of users that simply deal with this
> > unnecessary limitation.
> >
> > I am certainly not shoving this patch through anyone's throat if there
> > is no interest. But we definitely find it a very useful feature ...
>
> Let me try to see if we can get this done cleaner.
>
> One ugly part (in general here) is the custom page replacement in the
> registration part.
>
> We are guaranteed to have a MAP_PRIVATE mapping. Instead of replacing pages
> ourselves (which we likely shouldn't do ...) ... maybe we could use
> FAULT_FLAG_UNSHARE faults such that we will get an anonymous folio
> populated. (like KSM does nowadays)
>
> Punching FOLL_PIN|FOLL_LONGTERM into GUP would achieve the same thing, but
> using FOLL_WRITE would not work on many file systems. So maybe we have to
> trigger an unsharing fault ourselves.
>
> That would do the page replacement for us and we "should" be able to lookup
> an anonymous folio that we can then just modify, like ptrace would.
>
> But then, there is also unregistration part, with weird conditional page
> replacement. Zapping the anon page if the content matches the content of the
> original page is one thing. But why are we placing an existing anonymous
> page by a new anonymous page when the content from the original page differs
> (but matches the one from the just copied page?)?
>
> I'll have to further think about that one. It's all a bit nasty.
Sounds good to me. I am willing to help with the code when you have a
plan or testing as you see fit. Let me know.
> One thing to note is that hugetlb folios don't grow on trees. Likely, Many
> setups *don't* reserve extra hugetlb folios and you might just easily be
> running out of free hugetlb folios that you can use to break COW here
> (replace a file hugetlb by a fresh anon hugetlb page). Likely it's easy to
> make register or unregister fail.
Agreed.
--
Guillaume Morin <guillaume@morinfr.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-22 20:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-19 18:37 [RFC][PATCH] uprobe: support for private hugetlb mappings Guillaume Morin
2024-04-22 9:39 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-22 18:11 ` Guillaume Morin
2024-04-22 18:59 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-22 20:53 ` Guillaume Morin [this message]
2024-04-24 20:09 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-24 20:44 ` Guillaume Morin
2024-04-24 21:00 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-25 15:19 ` Guillaume Morin
2024-04-25 15:42 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-25 19:56 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-26 0:09 ` Guillaume Morin
2024-04-26 7:19 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-26 19:55 ` Guillaume Morin
2024-04-30 15:22 ` Guillaume Morin
2024-04-30 18:21 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-30 18:58 ` Guillaume Morin
2024-04-30 19:25 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-05-02 3:59 ` Guillaume Morin
2024-05-16 17:44 ` Guillaume Morin
2024-05-16 19:52 ` David Hildenbrand
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=ZibOQI9kwzE98n12@bender.morinfr.org \
--to=guillaume@morinfr.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.