On 01/02/2021 19:55, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 2/1/21 7:00 PM, Milan Broz wrote:
>> On 01/02/2021 14:08, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>> On 1/8/21 3:39 PM, Milan Broz wrote:
>>>> On 08/01/2021 14:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>>> On Wed 06-01-21 16:20:15, Milan Broz wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> we use mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE) / munlockall() in cryptsetup code
>>>>>> and someone tried to use it with hardened memory allocator library.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Execution time was increased to extreme (minutes) and as we found, the problem
>>>>>> is in munlockall().
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here is a plain reproducer for the core without any external code - it takes
>>>>>> unlocking on Fedora rawhide kernel more than 30 seconds!
>>>>>> I can reproduce it on 5.10 kernels and Linus' git.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The reproducer below tries to mmap large amount memory with PROT_NONE (later never used).
>>>>>> The real code of course does something more useful but the problem is the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>>>>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>>>>> #include <fcntl.h>
>>>>>> #include <sys/mman.h>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int main (int argc, char *argv[])
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> void *p = mmap(NULL, 1UL << 41, PROT_NONE, MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
>
> So, this is 2TB memory area, but PROT_NONE means it's never actually populated,
> although mlockall(MCL_CURRENT) should do that. Once you put PROT_READ |
> PROT_WRITE there, the mlockall() starts taking ages.
>
> So does that reflect your use case? munlockall() with large PROT_NONE areas? If
> so, munlock_vma_pages_range() is indeed not optimized for that, but I would
> expect such scenario to be uncommon, so better clarify first.
It is just a simple reproducer of the underlying problem, as suggested here
https://gitlab.com/cryptsetup/cryptsetup/-/issues/617#note_478342301
We use mlockall() in cryptsetup and with hardened malloc it slows down unlock significantly.
(For the real case problem please read the whole issue report above.)
m.
