[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]

[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license
is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]

[[!tag open_issue_gnumach]]


# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-23

    <braunr> btw, i'm running a gnumach version using red-black trees for vm
      map entries
    <antrik> braunr: sounds fashionable ;-)
    <youpi> braunr: with some perf improvement?
    <braunr> looks promising for our ext2fs instances showing several thousands
      of map entries
    <braunr> youpi: i'm not using it for lookups yet
    <braunr> but the tree is there, maintained, used for both regular and copy
      maps, and it doesn't crash
    <youpi> good :)
    <braunr> antrik: isn't it ? :)
    <braunr> youpi: and the diff stat is like 50/15
    <antrik> braunr: what's the goal of using the fashionable trees?
    <braunr> antrik: speeding up lookups in address spaces
    <antrik> braunr: so the idea is that if we have a heavily fragmented
      address space, the performance penalty is smaller?
    <braunr> yes
    <antrik> OK
    <antrik> I take it you gave up on attempts to actually decrease
      fragmentation?...
    <braunr> it's not as good as reducing fragmentation, which requires
      implementing a powerful merge, but it's still better
    <braunr> yes
    <braunr> it's too messy for my brain :/
    <antrik> I see
    <antrik> oh
    <braunr> it will add some overhead though
    <youpi> I guess log(n) ?
    <braunr> but if there is a significant performance gain, it'll be worth it
    <braunr> yes
    <braunr> i was more thinking about the memory overhead
    <antrik> right now it's a linear list?
    <youpi> I don't think we care nowadays :)
    <braunr> antrik: yes
    <antrik> ouch
    <braunr> antrik: yes ... :>
    <braunr> the original authors expected vm maps to have like 30 entries
    <braunr> so they used a list for the maps, and a hash table for the
      object/offset to physical page lookups
    <braunr> there is a small lookup cache though, which is a nice optimization
    <braunr> my code now uses it first, and falls back to the RB tree if the
      hint didn't help
    <antrik> braunr: well, don't forget to check whether it actually *is* still
      an optimisation, when using fashionable trees ;-)
    <braunr> antrik: i checked that already :)
    <braunr> i did the same in x15
    <antrik> I see
    <braunr> both bsd and linux uses a similar technique
    <braunr> use*
    <braunr> (well, bsd actually use what is done in mach :)
    <antrik> (or perhaps the other way around... ;-) )
    <braunr> i don't think so, as the bsd vm is really the mach vm
    <braunr> but we don't care much
    <antrik> oh, right... that part actually went full circle
    <braunr> youpi: i have a patch ready for test on machines with significant
      amounts of map entries (e.g. the buildds ..)
    <braunr> youpi: i won't have time for tests tonight, are you interested ?
    <braunr> (i've been running it for 15 minutes without any issue for now)
    <youpi> I'd say post to the list
    <braunr> ok
    <youpi> braunr: your patch uses the rb tree for lookups, right?
    <youpi> braunr: the buildd using rbtree seems swift
    <youpi> but maybe it's just a psychologic effect :)
    <youpi> the chroot ext2fs already has 1392 lines in vminfo
    <youpi> an rbtree can't hurt  there :)
    <youpi> braunr: it really seems faster
    <youpi> the reboot might have helped too
    <youpi> benchmarks shall say
    <youpi> for now, I'll just let ironforge use it
    <antrik> youpi: it's always fast after a reboot ;-)
    <youpi> sure
    <youpi> but still
    <youpi> I mean
    <youpi> *obviously* the reboot has helped
    <youpi> but it might not be all
    <youpi> at least it feels so
    <youpi> and obviously only benchmarks can say
    <antrik> the major benefit AIUI is rather that the slowdown happening over
      time will be less noticable

[[performance/degradation]].

    <youpi> "over time" is actually quite fast
    <youpi> ext2 fills up very quickly when you build a package
    <youpi> it went up to 1700 lines very quickly
    <youpi> and stabilized around there
    <antrik> yeah, it can be very fast under heavy load
    <youpi> that's why I say reboot seems not all
    <youpi> it's already not so fresh
    <youpi> with 1700 lines in vminfo
    <antrik> well, I don't know how much of the slowdown I'm experiencing
      (after doing stuff under memory pressure) is actually related to VM map
      fragmentation...
    <antrik> might be all, might be none, might be something in between
    <youpi> then try his patch
    <antrik> guess I should play a bit with vminfo...
    <antrik> well, currently I actually experience pretty little slowdown, as
      for certain reasons (only indirectly related to the Hurd) I'm not running
      mutt on this machine, so I don't really have memory pressure...


## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-24

    <braunr> youpi: yes, it uses bst lookups
    <braunr> youpi: FYI, the last time i checked, one ext2fs instance had 4k+
      map entries, and another around 7.5k
    <braunr> (on ironforge)


## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-24

    <youpi> braunr: $ sudo vminfo  624 | wc -l
    <youpi> 22957
    <youpi> there's no way it can not help :)
    <braunr> youpi: 23k, that's really huge


## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-26

    <braunr> youpi: any new numbers wrt the rbtree patch ?
    <youpi> well, buildd times are not really accurate :)
    <youpi> but what I can tell is that it managed to build qtwebkit fine
    <braunr> ok
    <youpi> so the patch is probably safe :)
    <braunr> i'll commit it soon then
    <youpi> I'd say feel free to, yes
    <braunr> thanks


## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-27

    <braunr> elmig: don't expect anything grand though, this patch is mostly
      useful when address spaces get really fragmented, which mainly happens on
      buildds
    <braunr> (and it only speeds lookups, which isn't as good as reducing
      fragmentation; things like fork still have to copy thousands of map
      entries)

[[glibc/fork]].


## IRC, freenode, #hurdfr, 2012-06-02

    <youpi> braunr: oh, un bug de rbtree
    <youpi> Assertion `diff != 0' failed in file "vm/vm_map.c", line 1002
    <youpi> c'est dans rbtree_insert()
    <youpi> vm_map_enter (vm/vm_map.c:1002).
    <youpi> vm_map (vm/vm_user.c:373).
    <youpi> syscall_vm_map (kern/ipc_mig.c:657).
    <youpi> erf j'ai tué mon débuggueur, je ne peux pas inspecter plus
    <youpi> le peu qui me reste c'est qu'apparemment target_map == 1, size ==
      0, mask == 0
    <youpi> anywhere = 1
    <braunr> youpi: ça signifie sûrement que des adresses overlappent
    <braunr> je rejetterai un coup d'oeil sur le code demain
    <braunr> (si ça se trouve c'est un bug rare de la vm, le genre qui fait
      crasher le noyau)
    <braunr> (enfin jveux dire, qui faisait crasher le noyau de façon très
      obscure avant le patch rbtree)


### IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-07-15

    <bddebian> I get errors in vm_map.c whenever I try to "mount" a CD
    <bddebian> Hmm, this time it rebooted the machine
    <bddebian> braunr: The translator set this time and the machine reboots
      before I can get the full message about vm_map, but here is some of the
      crap I get:  http://paste.debian.net/179191/
    <braunr> oh
    <braunr> nice
    <braunr> that may be the bug youpi saw with my redblack tree patch
    <braunr> bddebian: assert(diff != 0); ?
    <bddebian> Aye
    <braunr> good
    <braunr> it means we're trying to insert a vm_map_entry at a region in a
      map which is already occupied
    <bddebian> Oh
    <braunr> and unlike the previous code, the tree actually checks that
    <braunr> it has to
    <braunr> so you just simply use the iso9660fs translator and it crashes ?
    <bddebian> Well it used to on just trying to set the translator.  This time
      I was able to set the translator but as soon as I cd to the mount point I
      get all that crap
    <braunr> that's very good
    <braunr> more test cases to fix the vm


### IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-11-01

    <youpi> braunr: Assertion `diff != 0' failed in file "vm/vm_map.c", line
      1002
    <youpi> that's in rbtree_insert
    <braunr> youpi: the problem isn't the tree, it's the map entries
    <braunr> some must overlap
    <braunr> if you can inspect that, it would be helpful
    <youpi> I have a kdb there
    <youpi> it's within a port_name_to_task system call
    <braunr> this assertion basically means there already is an item in the
      tree where the new item is supposed to be inserted
    <youpi> this port_name_to_task presence in the stack is odd
    <braunr> it's in vm_map_enter
    <youpi> there's a vm_map just after that (and the assembly trap code
      before)
    <youpi> I know
    <youpi> I'm wondering about the caller
    <braunr> do you have a way to inspect the inserted map entry ?
    <youpi> I'm actually wondering whether I have the right kernel in gdb
    <braunr> oh
    <youpi> better
    <youpi> with the right kernel :)
    <youpi> 0x80039acf (syscall_vm_map)
      (target_map=d48b6640,address=d3b63f90,size=0,mask=0,anywhere=1)
    <youpi> size == 0 seems odd to me
    <youpi> (same parameters for vm_map)
    <braunr> right
    <braunr> my code does assume an entry has a non null size
    <braunr> (in the entry comparison function)
    <braunr>        EINVAL (since Linux 2.6.12) length was 0.
    <braunr> that's a quick glance at mmap(2)
    <braunr> might help track bugs from userspace (e.g. in exec .. :))
    <braunr> posix says the saem
    <braunr> same*
    <braunr> the gnumach manual isn't that precise
    <youpi> I don't seem to manage to read the entry
    <youpi> but I guess size==0 is the problem anyway
    <mcsim> youpi, braunr: Is there another kernel fault? Was that in my
      kernel?
    <braunr> no that's another problem
    <braunr> which became apparent following the addition of red black trees in
      the vm_map code
    <braunr> (but which was probably present long before)
    <mcsim> braunr: BTW, do you know if there where some specific circumstances
      that led to memory exhaustion in my code? Or it just aggregated over
      time?
    <braunr> mcsim: i don't know
    <mcsim> s/where/were
    <mcsim> braunr: ok


### IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-11-05

    <tschwinge> braunr: I have now also hit the diff != 0 assertion error;
      sitting in KDB, waiting for your commands.
    <braunr> tschwinge: can you check the backtrace, have a look at the system
      call and its parameters like youpi did ?
    <tschwinge> If I manage to figure out how to do that...  :-)
    * tschwinge goes read scrollback.
    <braunr> "trace" i suppose
    <braunr> if running inside qemu, you can use the integrated gdb server
    <tschwinge> braunr: No, hardware.  And work intervened.  And mobile phone
      <-> laptop via bluetooth didn't work.  But now:
    <tschwinge> Pretty similar to Samuel's:
    <tschwinge>     Assert([...])
    <tschwinge>     vm_map_enter(0xc11de6c8, 0xc1785f94, 0, 0, 1)
    <tschwinge>     vm_map(0xc11de6c8, 0xc1785f94, 0, 0, 1)
    <tschwinge>     syscall_vm_map(1, 0x1024a88, 0, 0, 1)
    <tschwinge>     mach_call_call(1, 0x1024a88, 0, 0, 1)
    <braunr> thanks
    <braunr> same as youpi observed, the requested size for the mapping is 0
    <braunr> tschwinge: thanks
    <tschwinge> braunr: Anything else you'd like to see before I reboot?
    <braunr> tschwinge: no, that's enough for now, and the other kind of info
      i'd like are much more difficult to obtain
    <braunr> if we still have the problem once a small patch to prevent null
      size is applied, then it'll be worth looking more into it
    <pinotree> isn't it possible to find out who called with that size?
    <braunr> not easy, no
    <braunr> it's also likely that the call that fails isn't the first one
    <pinotree> ah sure
    <pinotree> braunr: making mmap reject 0 size length could help? posix says
      such size should be rejected straight away
    <braunr> 17:09 < braunr> if we still have the problem once a small patch to
      prevent null size is applied, then it'll be worth looking more into it
    <braunr> that's the idea
    <braunr> making faulty processes choke on it should work fine :)
    <pinotree> «If len is zero, mmap() shall fail and no mapping shall be
      established.»
    <pinotree> braunr: should i cook up such patch for mmap?
    <braunr> no, the change must be applied in gnumach
    <pinotree> sure, but that could simply such condition in mmap (ie avoiding
      to call io_map on a file)
    <braunr> such calls are erroneous and rare, i don't see the need
    <pinotree> ok
    <braunr> i bet it comes from the exec server anyway :p
    <tschwinge> braunr: Is the mmap with size 0 already a reproducible testcase
      you can use for the diff != 0 assertion?
    <tschwinge> Otherwise I'd have a reproducer now.
    <braunr> tschwinge: i'm not sure but probably yes
    <tschwinge> braunr: Otherwise, take GDB sources, then: gcc -fsplit-stack
      gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/morestack.c && ./a.out
    <tschwinge> I have not looked what exactly this does; I think -fsplit-stack
      is not really implemented for us (needs something in libgcc we might not
      have), is on my GCC TODO list already.
    <braunr> tschwinge: interesting too :)


### IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-11-19

    <tschwinge> braunr: Hmm, I have now hit the diff != 0 GNU Mach assertion
      failure during some GCC invocation (GCC testsuite) that does not relate
      to -fsplit-stack (as the others before always have).
    <tschwinge> Reproduced:
      /media/erich/home/thomas/tmp/gcc/hurd/master.build/gcc/xgcc
      -B/media/erich/home/thomas/tmp/gcc/hurd/master.build/gcc/
      /home/thomas/tmp/gcc/hurd/master/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr42878-1.c
      -fno-diagnostics-show-caret -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin
      -fno-fat-lto-objects -fcompare-debug -S -o pr42878-1.s
    <tschwinge> Will check whether it's the same backtrace in GNU Mach.
    <tschwinge> Yes, same.
    <braunr> tschwinge: as youpi seems quite busy these days, i'll cook a patch
      and commit it directly
    <tschwinge> braunr: Thanks!  I have, by the way, confirmed that the
      following is enough to trigger the issue: vm_map(mach_task_self(), 0, 0,
      0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0);
    <tschwinge> ... and before the allocator patch, GNU Mach did accept that
      and return 0 -- though I did not check what effect it actually has.  (And
      I don't think it has any useful one.)  I'm also reading that as of lately
      (Linux 2.6.12), mmap (length = 0) is to return EINVAL, which I think is
      the foremost user of vm_map.
    <pinotree> tschwinge: posix too says to return EINVAL for length = 0
    <braunr> yes, we checked that earlier with youpi

[[!message-id "87sj8522zx.fsf@kepler.schwinge.homeip.net"]].

    <braunr> tschwinge: well, actually your patch is what i had in mind
      (although i'd like one in vm_map_enter to catch wrong kernel requests
      too)
    <braunr> tschwinge: i'll work on it tonight, and do some testing to make
      sure we don't regress critical stuff (exec is another major direct user
      of vm_map iirc)
    <tschwinge> braunr: Oh, OK.  :-)