linux-toradex.git/kernel/bpf/memalloc.c, branch v6.12-rc4

bpf: Fix percpu address space issues

2024-08-22T15:01:50+00:00

In arraymap.c:

In bpf_array_map_seq_start() and bpf_array_map_seq_next()
cast return values from the __percpu address space to
the generic address space via uintptr_t [1].

Correct the declaration of pptr pointer in __bpf_array_map_seq_show()
to void __percpu * and cast the value from the generic address
space to the __percpu address space via uintptr_t [1].

In hashtab.c:

Assign the return value from bpf_mem_cache_alloc() to void pointer
and cast the value to void __percpu ** (void pointer to percpu void
pointer) before dereferencing.

In memalloc.c:

Explicitly declare __percpu variables.

Cast obj to void __percpu **.

In helpers.c:

Cast ptr in BPF_CALL_1 and BPF_CALL_2 from generic address space
to __percpu address space via const uintptr_t [1].

Found by GCC's named address space checks.

There were no changes in the resulting object files.

[1] https://sparse.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/annotations.html#address-space-name

Signed-off-by: Uros Bizjak 
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov 
Cc: Daniel Borkmann 
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko 
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau 
Cc: Eduard Zingerman 
Cc: Song Liu 
Cc: Yonghong Song 
Cc: John Fastabend 
Cc: KP Singh 
Cc: Stanislav Fomichev 
Cc: Hao Luo 
Cc: Jiri Olsa 
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240811161414.56744-1-ubizjak@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

mm: remove CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM

2024-07-10T19:14:54+00:00

CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM used to be a user-visible option for whether slab
tracking is enabled.  It has been default-enabled and equivalent to
CONFIG_MEMCG for almost a decade.  We've only grown more kernel memory
accounting sites since, and there is no imaginable cgroup usecase going
forward that wants to track user pages but not the multitude of
user-drivable kernel allocations.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240701153148.452230-1-hannes@cmpxchg.org
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner 
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin 
Acked-by: Michal Hocko 
Acked-by: Shakeel Butt 
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand 
Cc: Muchun Song 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton

mm: memcg: add NULL check to obj_cgroup_put()

2024-04-26T03:55:43+00:00

9 out of 16 callers perform a NULL check before calling obj_cgroup_put(). 
Move the NULL check in the function, similar to mem_cgroup_put().  The
unlikely() NULL check in current_objcg_update() was left alone to avoid
dropping the unlikey() annotation as this a fast path.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240316015803.2777252-1-yosryahmed@google.com
Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed 
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner 
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin 
Cc: Michal Hocko 
Cc: Muchun Song 
Cc: Shakeel Butt 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton

bpf: Remove unnecessary cpu == 0 check in memalloc

2024-01-04T18:18:14+00:00

After merging the patch set [1] to reduce memory usage
for bpf_global_percpu_ma, Alexei found a redundant check (cpu == 0)
in function bpf_mem_alloc_percpu_unit_init() ([2]).
Indeed, the check is unnecessary since c->unit_size will
be all NULL or all non-NULL for all cpus before
for_each_possible_cpu() loop.
Removing the check makes code less confusing.

  [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231222031729.1287957-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev/
  [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231222031745.1289082-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev/

Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240104165744.702239-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: Use smaller low/high marks for percpu allocation

2024-01-04T05:08:25+00:00

Currently, refill low/high marks are set with the assumption
of normal non-percpu memory allocation. For example, for
an allocation size 256, for non-percpu memory allocation,
low mark is 32 and high mark is 96, resulting in the
batch allocation of 48 elements and the allocated memory
will be 48 * 256 = 12KB for this particular cpu.
Assuming an 128-cpu system, the total memory consumption
across all cpus will be 12K * 128 = 1.5MB memory.

This might be okay for non-percpu allocation, but may not be
good for percpu allocation, which will consume 1.5MB * 128 = 192MB
memory in the worst case if every cpu has a chance of memory
allocation.

In practice, percpu allocation is very rare compared to
non-percpu allocation. So let us have smaller low/high marks
which can avoid unnecessary memory consumption.

Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song 
Acked-by: Hou Tao 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231222031755.1289671-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: Refill only one percpu element in memalloc

2024-01-04T05:08:25+00:00

Typically for percpu map element or data structure, once allocated,
most operations are lookup or in-place update. Deletion are really
rare. Currently, for percpu data strcture, 4 elements will be
refilled if the size is <= 256. Let us just do with one element
for percpu data. For example, for size 256 and 128 cpus, the
potential saving will be 3 * 256 * 128 * 128 = 12MB.

Acked-by: Hou Tao 
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231222031750.1289290-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: Allow per unit prefill for non-fix-size percpu memory allocator

2024-01-04T05:08:25+00:00

Commit 41a5db8d8161 ("Add support for non-fix-size percpu mem allocation")
added support for non-fix-size percpu memory allocation.
Such allocation will allocate percpu memory for all buckets on all
cpus and the memory consumption is in the order to quadratic.
For example, let us say, 4 cpus, unit size 16 bytes, so each
cpu has 16 * 4 = 64 bytes, with 4 cpus, total will be 64 * 4 = 256 bytes.
Then let us say, 8 cpus with the same unit size, each cpu
has 16 * 8 = 128 bytes, with 8 cpus, total will be 128 * 8 = 1024 bytes.
So if the number of cpus doubles, the number of memory consumption
will be 4 times. So for a system with large number of cpus, the
memory consumption goes up quickly with quadratic order.
For example, for 4KB percpu allocation, 128 cpus. The total memory
consumption will 4KB * 128 * 128 = 64MB. Things will become
worse if the number of cpus is bigger (e.g., 512, 1024, etc.)

In Commit 41a5db8d8161, the non-fix-size percpu memory allocation is
done in boot time, so for system with large number of cpus, the initial
percpu memory consumption is very visible. For example, for 128 cpu
system, the total percpu memory allocation will be at least
(16 + 32 + 64 + 96 + 128 + 196 + 256 + 512 + 1024 + 2048 + 4096)
  * 128 * 128 = ~138MB.
which is pretty big. It will be even bigger for larger number of cpus.

Note that the current prefill also allocates 4 entries if the unit size
is less than 256. So on top of 138MB memory consumption, this will
add more consumption with
3 * (16 + 32 + 64 + 96 + 128 + 196 + 256) * 128 * 128 = ~38MB.
Next patch will try to reduce this memory consumption.

Later on, Commit 1fda5bb66ad8 ("bpf: Do not allocate percpu memory
at init stage") moved the non-fix-size percpu memory allocation
to bpf verificaiton stage. Once a particular bpf_percpu_obj_new()
is called by bpf program, the memory allocator will try to fill in
the cache with all sizes, causing the same amount of percpu memory
consumption as in the boot stage.

To reduce the initial percpu memory consumption for non-fix-size
percpu memory allocation, instead of filling the cache with all
supported allocation sizes, this patch intends to fill the cache
only for the requested size. As typically users will not use large
percpu data structure, this can save memory significantly.
For example, the allocation size is 64 bytes with 128 cpus.
Then total percpu memory amount will be 64 * 128 * 128 = 1MB,
much less than previous 138MB.

Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song 
Acked-by: Hou Tao 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231222031745.1289082-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: Add objcg to bpf_mem_alloc

2024-01-04T05:08:25+00:00

The objcg is a bpf_mem_alloc level property since all bpf_mem_cache's
are with the same objcg. This patch made such a property explicit.
The next patch will use this property to save and restore objcg
for percpu unit allocator.

Acked-by: Hou Tao 
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231222031739.1288590-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: Avoid unnecessary extra percpu memory allocation

2024-01-04T05:08:25+00:00

Currently, for percpu memory allocation, say if the user
requests allocation size to be 32 bytes, the actually
calculated size will be 40 bytes and it further rounds
to 64 bytes, and eventually 64 bytes are allocated,
wasting 32-byte memory.

Change bpf_mem_alloc() to calculate the cache index
based on the user-provided allocation size so unnecessary
extra memory can be avoided.

Suggested-by: Hou Tao 
Acked-by: Hou Tao 
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231222031734.1288400-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: Use c->unit_size to select target cache during free

2023-12-20T21:25:46+00:00

At present, bpf memory allocator uses check_obj_size() to ensure that
ksize() of allocated pointer is equal with the unit_size of used
bpf_mem_cache. Its purpose is to prevent bpf_mem_free() from selecting
a bpf_mem_cache which has different unit_size compared with the
bpf_mem_cache used for allocation. But as reported by lkp, the return
value of ksize() or kmalloc_size_roundup() may change due to slab merge
and it will lead to the warning report in check_obj_size().

The reported warning happened as follows:
(1) in bpf_mem_cache_adjust_size(), kmalloc_size_roundup(96) returns the
object_size of kmalloc-96 instead of kmalloc-cg-96. The object_size of
kmalloc-96 is 96, so size_index for 96 is not adjusted accordingly.
(2) the object_size of kmalloc-cg-96 is adjust from 96 to 128 due to
slab merge in __kmem_cache_alias(). For SLAB, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN is
enabled by default for kmalloc slab, so align is 64 and size is 128 for
kmalloc-cg-96. SLUB has a similar merge logic, but its object_size will
not be changed, because its align is 8 under x86-64.
(3) when unit_alloc() does kmalloc_node(96, __GFP_ACCOUNT, node),
ksize() returns 128 instead of 96 for the returned pointer.
(4) the warning in check_obj_size() is triggered.

Considering the slab merge can happen in anytime (e.g, a slab created in
a new module), the following case is also possible: during the
initialization of bpf_global_ma, there is no slab merge and ksize() for
a 96-bytes object returns 96. But after that a new slab created by a
kernel module is merged to kmalloc-cg-96 and the object_size of
kmalloc-cg-96 is adjust from 96 to 128 (which is possible for x86-64 +
CONFIG_SLAB, because its alignment requirement is 64 for 96-bytes slab).
So soon or later, when bpf_global_ma frees a 96-byte-sized pointer
which is allocated from bpf_mem_cache with unit_size=96, bpf_mem_free()
will free the pointer through a bpf_mem_cache in which unit_size is 128,
because the return value of ksize() changes. The warning for the
mismatch will be triggered again.

A feasible fix is introducing similar APIs compared with ksize() and
kmalloc_size_roundup() to return the actually-allocated size instead of
size which may change due to slab merge, but it will introduce
unnecessary dependency on the implementation details of mm subsystem.

As for now the pointer of bpf_mem_cache is saved in the 8-bytes area
(or 4-bytes under 32-bit host) above the returned pointer, using
unit_size in the saved bpf_mem_cache to select the target cache instead
of inferring the size from the pointer itself. Beside no extra
dependency on mm subsystem, the performance for bpf_mem_free_rcu() is
also improved as shown below.

Before applying the patch, the performances of bpf_mem_alloc() and
bpf_mem_free_rcu() on 8-CPUs VM with one producer are as follows:

kmalloc : alloc 11.69 ± 0.28M/s free 29.58 ± 0.93M/s
percpu  : alloc 14.11 ± 0.52M/s free 14.29 ± 0.99M/s

After apply the patch, the performance for bpf_mem_free_rcu() increases
9% and 146% for kmalloc memory and per-cpu memory respectively:

kmalloc: alloc 11.01 ± 0.03M/s free   32.42 ± 0.48M/s
percpu:  alloc 12.84 ± 0.12M/s free   35.24 ± 0.23M/s

After the fixes, there is no need to adjust size_index to fix the
mismatch between allocation and free, so remove it as well. Also return
NULL instead of ZERO_SIZE_PTR for zero-sized alloc in bpf_mem_alloc(),
because there is no bpf_mem_cache pointer saved above ZERO_SIZE_PTR.

Fixes: 9077fc228f09 ("bpf: Use kmalloc_size_roundup() to adjust size_index")
Reported-by: kernel test robot 
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/202310302113.9f8fe705-oliver.sang@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Hou Tao 
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231216131052.27621-2-houtao@huaweicloud.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov