All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
To: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
	Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	Alistair Popple <alistair@popple.id.au>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com>,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Optimize mmu_notifier->invalidate_range callback
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:08:12 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171019030812.GB5246@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171019134319.1b856091@MiWiFi-R3-srv>

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 01:43:19PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 23:10:01 -0400
> jglisse@redhat.com wrote:
> 
> > From: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
> > 
> > (Andrew you already have v1 in your queue of patch 1, patch 2 is new,
> >  i think you can drop it patch 1 v1 for v2, v2 is bit more conservative
> >  and i fixed typos)
> > 
> > All this only affect user of invalidate_range callback (at this time
> > CAPI arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/npu-dma.c, IOMMU ATS/PASID in
> > drivers/iommu/amd_iommu_v2.c|intel-svm.c)
> > 
> > This patchset remove useless double call to mmu_notifier->invalidate_range
> > callback wherever it is safe to do so. The first patch just remove useless
> > call
> 
> As in an extra call? Where does that come from?

Before this patch you had the following pattern:
  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start();
  take_page_table_lock()
  ...
  update_page_table()
  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range()
  ...
  drop_page_table_lock()
  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end();

It happens that mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end() also make an
unconditional call to mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() so in the
above scenario you had 2 calls to mmu_notifier_invalidate_range()

Obviously one of the 2 call is useless. In some case you can drop
the first call (under the page table lock) this is what patch 1
does.

In other cases you can drop the second call that happen inside
mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end() that is what patch 2 does.

Hence why i am referring to useless double call. I have added
more documentation to explain all this in the code and also under
Documentation/vm/mmu_notifier.txt


> 
> > and add documentation explaining why it is safe to do so. The second
> > patch go further by introducing mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_only_end()
> > which skip callback to invalidate_range this can be done when clearing a
> > pte, pmd or pud with notification which call invalidate_range right after
> > clearing under the page table lock.
> >
> 
> Balbir Singh.
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
To: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
	Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	Alistair Popple <alistair@popple.id.au>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
	Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com>,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Optimize mmu_notifier->invalidate_range callback
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:08:12 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171019030812.GB5246@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171019134319.1b856091@MiWiFi-R3-srv>

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 01:43:19PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 23:10:01 -0400
> jglisse@redhat.com wrote:
> 
> > From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
> > 
> > (Andrew you already have v1 in your queue of patch 1, patch 2 is new,
> >  i think you can drop it patch 1 v1 for v2, v2 is bit more conservative
> >  and i fixed typos)
> > 
> > All this only affect user of invalidate_range callback (at this time
> > CAPI arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/npu-dma.c, IOMMU ATS/PASID in
> > drivers/iommu/amd_iommu_v2.c|intel-svm.c)
> > 
> > This patchset remove useless double call to mmu_notifier->invalidate_range
> > callback wherever it is safe to do so. The first patch just remove useless
> > call
> 
> As in an extra call? Where does that come from?

Before this patch you had the following pattern:
  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start();
  take_page_table_lock()
  ...
  update_page_table()
  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range()
  ...
  drop_page_table_lock()
  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end();

It happens that mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end() also make an
unconditional call to mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() so in the
above scenario you had 2 calls to mmu_notifier_invalidate_range()

Obviously one of the 2 call is useless. In some case you can drop
the first call (under the page table lock) this is what patch 1
does.

In other cases you can drop the second call that happen inside
mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end() that is what patch 2 does.

Hence why i am referring to useless double call. I have added
more documentation to explain all this in the code and also under
Documentation/vm/mmu_notifier.txt


> 
> > and add documentation explaining why it is safe to do so. The second
> > patch go further by introducing mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_only_end()
> > which skip callback to invalidate_range this can be done when clearing a
> > pte, pmd or pud with notification which call invalidate_range right after
> > clearing under the page table lock.
> >
> 
> Balbir Singh.
> 

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jerome Glisse <jglisse-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: Balbir Singh <bsingharora-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli
	<aarcange-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org>,
	Joerg Roedel <jroedel-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt
	<benh-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>,
	Andrew Donnellan
	<andrew.donnellan-8fk3Idey6ehBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Alistair Popple
	<alistair-Y4h6yKqj69EXC2x5gXVKYQ@public.gmane.org>,
	linuxppc-dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org,
	iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe-Gsx/Oe8HsFggBc27wqDAHg@public.gmane.org>,
	Andrew Morton
	<akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Optimize mmu_notifier->invalidate_range callback
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:08:12 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171019030812.GB5246@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171019134319.1b856091@MiWiFi-R3-srv>

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 01:43:19PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 23:10:01 -0400
> jglisse-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org wrote:
> 
> > From: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> > 
> > (Andrew you already have v1 in your queue of patch 1, patch 2 is new,
> >  i think you can drop it patch 1 v1 for v2, v2 is bit more conservative
> >  and i fixed typos)
> > 
> > All this only affect user of invalidate_range callback (at this time
> > CAPI arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/npu-dma.c, IOMMU ATS/PASID in
> > drivers/iommu/amd_iommu_v2.c|intel-svm.c)
> > 
> > This patchset remove useless double call to mmu_notifier->invalidate_range
> > callback wherever it is safe to do so. The first patch just remove useless
> > call
> 
> As in an extra call? Where does that come from?

Before this patch you had the following pattern:
  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start();
  take_page_table_lock()
  ...
  update_page_table()
  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range()
  ...
  drop_page_table_lock()
  mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end();

It happens that mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end() also make an
unconditional call to mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() so in the
above scenario you had 2 calls to mmu_notifier_invalidate_range()

Obviously one of the 2 call is useless. In some case you can drop
the first call (under the page table lock) this is what patch 1
does.

In other cases you can drop the second call that happen inside
mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end() that is what patch 2 does.

Hence why i am referring to useless double call. I have added
more documentation to explain all this in the code and also under
Documentation/vm/mmu_notifier.txt


> 
> > and add documentation explaining why it is safe to do so. The second
> > patch go further by introducing mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_only_end()
> > which skip callback to invalidate_range this can be done when clearing a
> > pte, pmd or pud with notification which call invalidate_range right after
> > clearing under the page table lock.
> >
> 
> Balbir Singh.
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2017-10-19  3:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-17  3:10 [PATCH 0/2] Optimize mmu_notifier->invalidate_range callback jglisse
2017-10-17  3:10 ` jglisse
2017-10-17  3:10 ` jglisse
2017-10-17  3:10 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm/mmu_notifier: avoid double notification when it is useless v2 jglisse
2017-10-17  3:10   ` jglisse
2017-10-17  3:10   ` jglisse-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA
2017-10-19  3:04   ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-19  3:04     ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-19  3:04     ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-19  3:28     ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-19  3:28       ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-19  3:28       ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-19 10:53       ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-19 10:53         ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-19 10:53         ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-19 16:58         ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-19 16:58           ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-19 16:58           ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-19 16:58           ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-21  5:54           ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-21  5:54             ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-21  5:54             ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-21  5:54             ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-21 15:47             ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-21 15:47               ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-21 15:47               ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-21 15:47               ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-23 20:35               ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-23 20:35                 ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-23 20:35                 ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-23 20:35                 ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-17  3:10 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm/mmu_notifier: avoid call to invalidate_range() in range_end() jglisse
2017-10-17  3:10   ` jglisse
2017-10-17  3:10   ` jglisse
2017-10-19  2:43 ` [PATCH 0/2] Optimize mmu_notifier->invalidate_range callback Balbir Singh
2017-10-19  2:43   ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-19  2:43   ` Balbir Singh
2017-10-19  3:08   ` Jerome Glisse [this message]
2017-10-19  3:08     ` Jerome Glisse
2017-10-19  3:08     ` Jerome Glisse

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=20171019030812.GB5246@redhat.com \
    --to=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alistair@popple.id.au \
    --cc=andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jroedel@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.