Stefano Garzarella
2022-Sep-28 08:28 UTC
[PATCH] vhost/vsock: Use kvmalloc/kvfree for larger packets.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 03:45:38PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:>When copying a large file over sftp over vsock, data size is usually 32kB, >and kmalloc seems to fail to try to allocate 32 32kB regions. > > Call Trace: > [<ffffffffb6a0df64>] dump_stack+0x97/0xdb > [<ffffffffb68d6aed>] warn_alloc_failed+0x10f/0x138 > [<ffffffffb68d868a>] ? __alloc_pages_direct_compact+0x38/0xc8 > [<ffffffffb664619f>] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x84c/0x90d > [<ffffffffb6646e56>] alloc_kmem_pages+0x17/0x19 > [<ffffffffb6653a26>] kmalloc_order_trace+0x2b/0xdb > [<ffffffffb66682f3>] __kmalloc+0x177/0x1f7 > [<ffffffffb66e0d94>] ? copy_from_iter+0x8d/0x31d > [<ffffffffc0689ab7>] vhost_vsock_handle_tx_kick+0x1fa/0x301 [vhost_vsock] > [<ffffffffc06828d9>] vhost_worker+0xf7/0x157 [vhost] > [<ffffffffb683ddce>] kthread+0xfd/0x105 > [<ffffffffc06827e2>] ? vhost_dev_set_owner+0x22e/0x22e [vhost] > [<ffffffffb683dcd1>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xf3/0xf3 > [<ffffffffb6eb332e>] ret_from_fork+0x4e/0x80 > [<ffffffffb683dcd1>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xf3/0xf3 > >Work around by doing kvmalloc instead. > >Signed-off-by: Junichi Uekawa <uekawa at chromium.org> >--- > > drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 2 +- > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c >index 368330417bde..5703775af129 100644 >--- a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c >+++ b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c >@@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ vhost_vsock_alloc_pkt(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq, > return NULL; > } > >- pkt->buf = kmalloc(pkt->len, GFP_KERNEL); >+ pkt->buf = kvmalloc(pkt->len, GFP_KERNEL); > if (!pkt->buf) { > kfree(pkt); > return NULL; >diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c >index ec2c2afbf0d0..3a12aee33e92 100644 >--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c >+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c >@@ -1342,7 +1342,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_transport_recv_pkt); > > void virtio_transport_free_pkt(struct virtio_vsock_pkt *pkt) > { >- kfree(pkt->buf); >+ kvfree(pkt->buf);virtio_transport_free_pkt() is used also in virtio_transport.c and vsock_loopback.c where pkt->buf is allocated with kmalloc(), but IIUC kvfree() can be used with that memory, so this should be fine.> kfree(pkt); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_transport_free_pkt); >-- >2.37.3.998.g577e59143f-goog >This issue should go away with the Bobby's work about introducing sk_buff [1], but we can queue this for now. I'm not sure if we should do the same also in the virtio-vsock driver (virtio_transport.c). Here in vhost-vsock the buf allocated is only used in the host, while in the virtio-vsock driver the buffer is exposed to the device emulated in the host, so it should be physically contiguous (if not, maybe we need to adjust virtio_vsock_rx_fill()). So for now I think is fine to use kvmalloc only on vhost-vsock (eventually we can use it also in vsock_loopback), since the Bobby's patch should rework this code: Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/65d117ddc530d12a6d47fcc45b38891465a90d9f.1660362668.git.bobby.eshleman at bytedance.com/ Thanks, Stefano
Michael S. Tsirkin
2022-Sep-28 09:31 UTC
[PATCH] vhost/vsock: Use kvmalloc/kvfree for larger packets.
On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 10:28:23AM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 03:45:38PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > > When copying a large file over sftp over vsock, data size is usually 32kB, > > and kmalloc seems to fail to try to allocate 32 32kB regions. > > > > Call Trace: > > [<ffffffffb6a0df64>] dump_stack+0x97/0xdb > > [<ffffffffb68d6aed>] warn_alloc_failed+0x10f/0x138 > > [<ffffffffb68d868a>] ? __alloc_pages_direct_compact+0x38/0xc8 > > [<ffffffffb664619f>] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x84c/0x90d > > [<ffffffffb6646e56>] alloc_kmem_pages+0x17/0x19 > > [<ffffffffb6653a26>] kmalloc_order_trace+0x2b/0xdb > > [<ffffffffb66682f3>] __kmalloc+0x177/0x1f7 > > [<ffffffffb66e0d94>] ? copy_from_iter+0x8d/0x31d > > [<ffffffffc0689ab7>] vhost_vsock_handle_tx_kick+0x1fa/0x301 [vhost_vsock] > > [<ffffffffc06828d9>] vhost_worker+0xf7/0x157 [vhost] > > [<ffffffffb683ddce>] kthread+0xfd/0x105 > > [<ffffffffc06827e2>] ? vhost_dev_set_owner+0x22e/0x22e [vhost] > > [<ffffffffb683dcd1>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xf3/0xf3 > > [<ffffffffb6eb332e>] ret_from_fork+0x4e/0x80 > > [<ffffffffb683dcd1>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xf3/0xf3 > > > > Work around by doing kvmalloc instead. > > > > Signed-off-by: Junichi Uekawa <uekawa at chromium.org>My worry here is that this in more of a work around. It would be better to not allocate memory so aggressively: if we are so short on memory we should probably process packets one at a time. Is that very hard to implement?> > --- > > > > drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 2 +- > > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c > > index 368330417bde..5703775af129 100644 > > --- a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c > > +++ b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c > > @@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ vhost_vsock_alloc_pkt(struct vhost_virtqueue *vq, > > return NULL; > > } > > > > - pkt->buf = kmalloc(pkt->len, GFP_KERNEL); > > + pkt->buf = kvmalloc(pkt->len, GFP_KERNEL); > > if (!pkt->buf) { > > kfree(pkt); > > return NULL; > > diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c > > index ec2c2afbf0d0..3a12aee33e92 100644 > > --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c > > +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c > > @@ -1342,7 +1342,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_transport_recv_pkt); > > > > void virtio_transport_free_pkt(struct virtio_vsock_pkt *pkt) > > { > > - kfree(pkt->buf); > > + kvfree(pkt->buf); > > virtio_transport_free_pkt() is used also in virtio_transport.c and > vsock_loopback.c where pkt->buf is allocated with kmalloc(), but IIUC > kvfree() can be used with that memory, so this should be fine. > > > kfree(pkt); > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_transport_free_pkt); > > -- > > 2.37.3.998.g577e59143f-goog > > > > This issue should go away with the Bobby's work about introducing sk_buff > [1], but we can queue this for now. > > I'm not sure if we should do the same also in the virtio-vsock driver > (virtio_transport.c). Here in vhost-vsock the buf allocated is only used in > the host, while in the virtio-vsock driver the buffer is exposed to the > device emulated in the host, so it should be physically contiguous (if not, > maybe we need to adjust virtio_vsock_rx_fill()).More importantly it needs to support DMA API which IIUC kvmalloc memory does not.> So for now I think is fine to use kvmalloc only on vhost-vsock (eventually > we can use it also in vsock_loopback), since the Bobby's patch should rework > this code: > > Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/65d117ddc530d12a6d47fcc45b38891465a90d9f.1660362668.git.bobby.eshleman at bytedance.com/ > > Thanks, > Stefano