From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Stubbs <ams@codesourcery.com>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libgomp, openmp: pinned memory
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 19:47:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220104184740.GL2646553@tucnak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220104182829.GK2646553@tucnak>
On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 07:28:29PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > Other issues in the patch are that it doesn't munlock on deallocation and
> > > that because of that deallocation we need to figure out what to do on page
> > > boundaries. As documented, mlock can be passed address and/or address +
> > > size that aren't at page boundaries and pinning happens even just for
> > > partially touched pages. But munlock unpins also even the partially
> > > overlapping pages and we don't know at that point whether some other pinned
> > > allocations don't appear in those pages.
> >
> > Right, it doesn't munlock because of these issues. I don't know of any way
> > to solve this that wouldn't involve building tables of locked ranges (and
> > knowing what the page size is).
> >
> > I considered using mmap with the lock flag instead, but the failure mode
> > looked unhelpful. I guess we could mmap with the regular flags, then mlock
> > after. That should bypass the regular heap and ensure each allocation has
> > it's own page. I'm not sure what the unintended side-effects of that might
> > be.
>
> But the munlock is even more important because of the low ulimit -l, because
> if munlock isn't done on deallocation, the by default I think 64KB limit
> will be reached even much earlier. If most users have just 64KB limit on
> pinned memory per process, then that most likely asks for grabbing such memory
> in whole pages and doing memory management on that resource.
> Because vasting that precious memory on the partial pages which will most
> likely get non-pinned allocations when we just have 16 such pages is a big
> waste.
E.g. if we start using (dynamically, using dlopen/dlsym etc.) the memkind
library for some of the allocators, for the pinned memory we could use
e.g. the memkind_create_fixed API - on the first pinned allocation, check
what is the ulimit -l and if it is fairly small, mmap PROT_NONE the whole
pinned size (but don't pin it whole at start, just whatever we need as we
go).
Jakub
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-04 18:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-04 15:32 Andrew Stubbs
2022-01-04 15:55 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-01-04 16:58 ` Andrew Stubbs
2022-01-04 18:28 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-01-04 18:47 ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2022-01-05 17:07 ` Andrew Stubbs
2022-01-13 13:53 ` Andrew Stubbs
2022-06-07 11:05 ` Andrew Stubbs
2022-06-07 12:10 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-06-07 12:28 ` Andrew Stubbs
2022-06-07 12:40 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-06-09 9:38 ` Thomas Schwinge
2022-06-09 10:09 ` Tobias Burnus
2022-06-09 10:22 ` Stubbs, Andrew
2022-06-09 10:31 ` Stubbs, Andrew
2023-02-16 15:32 ` Attempt to register OpenMP pinned memory using a device instead of 'mlock' (was: [PATCH] libgomp, openmp: pinned memory) Thomas Schwinge
2023-02-16 16:17 ` Stubbs, Andrew
2023-02-16 22:06 ` [og12] " Thomas Schwinge
2023-02-17 8:12 ` Thomas Schwinge
2023-02-20 9:48 ` Andrew Stubbs
2023-02-20 13:53 ` [og12] Attempt to not just register but allocate OpenMP pinned memory using a device (was: [og12] Attempt to register OpenMP pinned memory using a device instead of 'mlock') Thomas Schwinge
2023-02-10 15:11 ` [PATCH] libgomp, openmp: pinned memory Thomas Schwinge
2023-02-10 15:55 ` Andrew Stubbs
2023-02-16 21:39 ` [og12] Clarify/verify OpenMP 'omp_calloc' zero-initialization for pinned memory (was: [PATCH] libgomp, openmp: pinned memory) Thomas Schwinge
2023-03-24 15:49 ` [og12] libgomp: Document OpenMP 'pinned' memory (was: [PATCH] libgomp, openmp: pinned memory Thomas Schwinge
2023-03-27 9:27 ` Stubbs, Andrew
2023-03-27 11:26 ` [og12] libgomp: Document OpenMP 'pinned' memory (was: [PATCH] libgomp, openmp: pinned memory) Thomas Schwinge
2023-03-27 12:01 ` Andrew Stubbs
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220104184740.GL2646553@tucnak \
--to=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=ams@codesourcery.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).