[v2] regset: use kvzalloc() for regset_get_alloc()

Message ID 20240205092626.v2.1.Id9ad163b60d21c9e56c2d686b0cc9083a8ba7924@changeid
State New
Headers
Series [v2] regset: use kvzalloc() for regset_get_alloc() |

Commit Message

Doug Anderson Feb. 5, 2024, 5:26 p.m. UTC
  While browsing through ChromeOS crash reports, I found one with an
allocation failure that looked like this:

  chrome: page allocation failure: order:7,
          mode:0x40dc0(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_COMP|__GFP_ZERO),
	  nodemask=(null),cpuset=urgent,mems_allowed=0
  CPU: 7 PID: 3295 Comm: chrome Not tainted
          5.15.133-20574-g8044615ac35c #1 (HASH:1162 1)
  Hardware name: Google Lazor (rev3 - 8) with KB Backlight (DT)
  Call trace:
  ...
  warn_alloc+0x104/0x174
  __alloc_pages+0x5f0/0x6e4
  kmalloc_order+0x44/0x98
  kmalloc_order_trace+0x34/0x124
  __kmalloc+0x228/0x36c
  __regset_get+0x68/0xcc
  regset_get_alloc+0x1c/0x28
  elf_core_dump+0x3d8/0xd8c
  do_coredump+0xeb8/0x1378
  get_signal+0x14c/0x804
  ...

An order 7 allocation is (1 << 7) contiguous pages, or 512K. It's not
a surprise that this allocation failed on a system that's been running
for a while.

More digging showed that it was fairly easy to see the order 7
allocation by just sending a SIGQUIT to chrome (or other processes) to
generate a core dump. The actual amount being allocated was 279,584
bytes and it was for "core_note_type" NT_ARM_SVE.

There was quite a bit of discussion [1] on the mailing lists in
response to my v1 patch attempting to switch to vmalloc. The overall
conclusion was that we could likely reduce the 279,584 byte allocation
by quite a bit and Mark Brown has sent a patch to that effect [2].
However even with the 279,584 byte allocation gone there are still
65,552 byte allocations. These are just barely more than the 65,536
bytes and thus would require an order 5 allocation.

An order 5 allocation is still something to avoid unless necessary and
nothing needs the memory here to be contiguous. Change the allocation
to kvzalloc() which should still be efficient for small allocations
but doesn't force the memory subsystem to work hard (and maybe fail)
at getting a large contiguous chunk.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240201171159.1.Id9ad163b60d21c9e56c2d686b0cc9083a8ba7924@changeid
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240203-arm64-sve-ptrace-regset-size-v1-1-2c3ba1386b9e@kernel.org

Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
---

Changes in v2:
- Use kvzalloc() instead of vmalloc().
- Update description based on v1 discussion.

 fs/binfmt_elf.c | 2 +-
 kernel/regset.c | 6 +++---
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
  

Comments

Doug Anderson Feb. 26, 2024, 11:55 p.m. UTC | #1
Hi,

On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 9:27 AM Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> While browsing through ChromeOS crash reports, I found one with an
> allocation failure that looked like this:
>
>   chrome: page allocation failure: order:7,
>           mode:0x40dc0(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_COMP|__GFP_ZERO),
>           nodemask=(null),cpuset=urgent,mems_allowed=0
>   CPU: 7 PID: 3295 Comm: chrome Not tainted
>           5.15.133-20574-g8044615ac35c #1 (HASH:1162 1)
>   Hardware name: Google Lazor (rev3 - 8) with KB Backlight (DT)
>   Call trace:
>   ...
>   warn_alloc+0x104/0x174
>   __alloc_pages+0x5f0/0x6e4
>   kmalloc_order+0x44/0x98
>   kmalloc_order_trace+0x34/0x124
>   __kmalloc+0x228/0x36c
>   __regset_get+0x68/0xcc
>   regset_get_alloc+0x1c/0x28
>   elf_core_dump+0x3d8/0xd8c
>   do_coredump+0xeb8/0x1378
>   get_signal+0x14c/0x804
>   ...
>
> An order 7 allocation is (1 << 7) contiguous pages, or 512K. It's not
> a surprise that this allocation failed on a system that's been running
> for a while.
>
> More digging showed that it was fairly easy to see the order 7
> allocation by just sending a SIGQUIT to chrome (or other processes) to
> generate a core dump. The actual amount being allocated was 279,584
> bytes and it was for "core_note_type" NT_ARM_SVE.
>
> There was quite a bit of discussion [1] on the mailing lists in
> response to my v1 patch attempting to switch to vmalloc. The overall
> conclusion was that we could likely reduce the 279,584 byte allocation
> by quite a bit and Mark Brown has sent a patch to that effect [2].
> However even with the 279,584 byte allocation gone there are still
> 65,552 byte allocations. These are just barely more than the 65,536
> bytes and thus would require an order 5 allocation.
>
> An order 5 allocation is still something to avoid unless necessary and
> nothing needs the memory here to be contiguous. Change the allocation
> to kvzalloc() which should still be efficient for small allocations
> but doesn't force the memory subsystem to work hard (and maybe fail)
> at getting a large contiguous chunk.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240201171159.1.Id9ad163b60d21c9e56c2d686b0cc9083a8ba7924@changeid
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240203-arm64-sve-ptrace-regset-size-v1-1-2c3ba1386b9e@kernel.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
> ---
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Use kvzalloc() instead of vmalloc().
> - Update description based on v1 discussion.
>
>  fs/binfmt_elf.c | 2 +-
>  kernel/regset.c | 6 +++---
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Just wanted to check in to see if there's anything else that I need to
do here. Mark's patch to avoid the order 7 allocations [1] has landed,
but we still want this kvzalloc() because the order 5 allocations
can't really be avoided. I'm happy to sit tight for longer but just
wanted to make sure it was clear that we still want my patch _in
addition_ to Mark's patch and to see if there was anything else you
needed me to do.

Thanks!

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240213-arm64-sve-ptrace-regset-size-v2-1-c7600ca74b9b@kernel.org
  

Patch

diff --git a/fs/binfmt_elf.c b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
index 5397b552fbeb..ac178ad38823 100644
--- a/fs/binfmt_elf.c
+++ b/fs/binfmt_elf.c
@@ -1928,7 +1928,7 @@  static void free_note_info(struct elf_note_info *info)
 		threads = t->next;
 		WARN_ON(t->notes[0].data && t->notes[0].data != &t->prstatus);
 		for (i = 1; i < info->thread_notes; ++i)
-			kfree(t->notes[i].data);
+			kvfree(t->notes[i].data);
 		kfree(t);
 	}
 	kfree(info->psinfo.data);
diff --git a/kernel/regset.c b/kernel/regset.c
index 586823786f39..b2871fa68b2a 100644
--- a/kernel/regset.c
+++ b/kernel/regset.c
@@ -16,14 +16,14 @@  static int __regset_get(struct task_struct *target,
 	if (size > regset->n * regset->size)
 		size = regset->n * regset->size;
 	if (!p) {
-		to_free = p = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
+		to_free = p = kvzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
 		if (!p)
 			return -ENOMEM;
 	}
 	res = regset->regset_get(target, regset,
 			   (struct membuf){.p = p, .left = size});
 	if (res < 0) {
-		kfree(to_free);
+		kvfree(to_free);
 		return res;
 	}
 	*data = p;
@@ -71,6 +71,6 @@  int copy_regset_to_user(struct task_struct *target,
 	ret = regset_get_alloc(target, regset, size, &buf);
 	if (ret > 0)
 		ret = copy_to_user(data, buf, ret) ? -EFAULT : 0;
-	kfree(buf);
+	kvfree(buf);
 	return ret;
 }