From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D60EC433FE for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 11:19:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7D7061268 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 11:19:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233065AbhKKLWP (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2021 06:22:15 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:23967 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229668AbhKKLWO (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2021 06:22:14 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1636629565; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=hcct+m77bB3BA7FIYH1yKziGwtFbgMvGYg90ik0HLxk=; b=KlYrIsXsiUcsE+1h6Eu6pqn0I1QP9MWpXjL0imDT0fHS7huwio/Kqk4N7W96eZLb8y3JrX Sb1J1kzSOox7zpMP17j2CO67o/0Du3Sjed31nz4CvvXOHRNSFxD3MJVr/xJUpyVwHYx2W6 OA6Mu1WPOM/yAm6iCkmfvCOYZq2UzwA= Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-519-843snVJkOmeMvGLeszd6fw-1; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 06:19:23 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 843snVJkOmeMvGLeszd6fw-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id f3-20020a5d50c3000000b00183ce1379feso958111wrt.5 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 03:19:23 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:organization:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=hcct+m77bB3BA7FIYH1yKziGwtFbgMvGYg90ik0HLxk=; b=MhqsOMyBmSI000o6kp82pgF5nap9JZsdeL8w22Fgo1c6G/i+6P5PhiBEeNthIcMahB ujL9tVIRaLRFjquMgD2aSuui9DQbg3yOGgkKvJGllEZ5V3K/dmDKWtMw/Pe85kAc2TwN LSfWHV5kkmE1deShle8/DZz0r4uIKrNWI8HYNg9p6wd9YLmQ1HxllndmRQoYM+e59hQR 0kFS04kRG5Rr7MT9d3yc9n4I8gC6Ax4SxIbCf4zZetiYT4pIE/UULGmqLaGQpMH3b5cS BAn6sx3l7Qi6tHuxlgSRQmJ0mDoD6zoynn+kdWeGEAozC87y2LsV2fUjHxAahV+wr+9W SN6A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530MK+uCgPVR+4jE9lpb7rJroJvfB6oiw/hW7iiTdDFAM8rO8eZz QKFec00NpVjOFzoz+2BaUhVds23SmiEZPp6JUFWe4PmovoCXlkLCZsHO1ShkdIvfhkiEjaca/VD L81nb0ppWT/2FfvzNhkW4pUl0 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1a86:: with SMTP id f6mr7984483wry.230.1636629562712; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 03:19:22 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyRkM24R3AJ++cyQ2YE83KFWcueuhjziquB4Ua9ZX6uR4pLCcr4om3xNDoflfqLqt388Odd2w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:1a86:: with SMTP id f6mr7984453wry.230.1636629562438; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 03:19:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.3.132] (p4ff23ee8.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [79.242.62.232]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o5sm2545810wrx.83.2021.11.11.03.19.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Nov 2021 03:19:21 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <27d73395-70b4-fe4a-4c8d-415b43ff9c1f@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 12:19:20 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/15] Free user PTE page table pages Content-Language: en-US To: Qi Zheng , Jason Gunthorpe Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, mika.penttila@nextfour.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, songmuchun@bytedance.com, zhouchengming@bytedance.com References: <20211110105428.32458-1-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com> <20211110125601.GQ1740502@nvidia.com> <8d0bc258-58ba-52c5-2e0d-a588489f2572@redhat.com> <20211110143859.GS1740502@nvidia.com> <6ac9cc0d-7dea-0e19-51b3-625ec6561ac7@redhat.com> <20211110163925.GX1740502@nvidia.com> <7c97d86f-57f4-f764-3e92-1660690a0f24@redhat.com> <60515562-5f93-11cd-6c6a-c7cc92ff3bf8@bytedance.com> <9ee06b52-4844-7996-fa34-34fc7d4fdc10@bytedance.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: <9ee06b52-4844-7996-fa34-34fc7d4fdc10@bytedance.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11.11.21 12:08, Qi Zheng wrote: > > > On 11/11/21 5:22 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 11.11.21 04:58, Qi Zheng wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 11/11/21 1:37 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>>> It would still be a fairly coarse-grained locking, I am not sure if that >>>>>> is a step into the right direction. If you want to modify *some* page >>>>>> table in your process you have exclude each and every page table walker. >>>>>> Or did I mis-interpret what you were saying? >>>>> >>>>> That is one possible design, it favours fast walking and penalizes >>>>> mutation. We could also stick a lock in the PMD (instead of a >>>>> refcount) and still logically be using a lock instead of a refcount >>>>> scheme. Remember modify here is "want to change a table pointer into a >>>>> leaf pointer" so it isn't an every day activity.. >>>> >>>> It will be if we somewhat frequent when reclaim an empty PTE page table >>>> as soon as it turns empty. This not only happens when zapping, but also >>>> during writeback/swapping. So while writing back / swapping you might be >>>> left with empty page tables to reclaim. >>>> >>>> Of course, this is the current approach. Another approach that doesn't >>>> require additional refcounts is scanning page tables for empty ones and >>>> reclaiming them. This scanning can either be triggered manually from >>>> user space or automatically from the kernel. >>> >>> Whether it is introducing a special rwsem or scanning an empty page >>> table, there are two problems as follows: >>> >>> #1. When to trigger the scanning or releasing? >> >> For example when reclaiming memory, when scanning page tables in >> khugepaged, or triggered by user space (note that this is the approach I >> originally looked into). But it certainly requires more locking thought >> to avoid stopping essentially any page table walker. >> >>> #2. Every time to release a 4K page table page, 512 page table >>> entries need to be scanned. >> >> It would happen only when actually trigger reclaim of page tables >> (again, someone has to trigger it), so it's barely an issue. >> >> For example, khugepaged already scans the page tables either way. >> >>> >>> For #1, if the scanning is triggered manually from user space, the >>> kernel is relatively passive, and the user does not fully know the best >>> timing to scan. If the scanning is triggered automatically from the >>> kernel, that is great. But the timing is not easy to confirm, is it >>> scanned and reclaimed every time zap or try_to_unmap? >>> >>> For #2, refcount has advantages. >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> There is some advantage with this thinking because it harmonizes well >>>>> with the other stuff that wants to convert tables into leafs, but has >>>>> to deal with complicated locking. >>>>> >>>>> On the other hand, refcounts are a degenerate kind of rwsem and only >>>>> help with freeing pages. It also puts more atomics in normal fast >>>>> paths since we are refcounting each PTE, not read locking the PMD. >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps the ideal thing would be to stick a rwsem in the PMD. read >>>>> means a table cannot be come a leaf. I don't know if there is space >>>>> for another atomic in the PMD level, and we'd have to use a hitching >>>>> post/hashed waitq scheme too since there surely isn't room for a waitq >>>>> too.. >>>>> >>>>> I wouldn't be so quick to say one is better than the other, but at >>>>> least let's have thought about a locking solution before merging >>>>> refcounts :) >>>> >>>> Yes, absolutely. I can see the beauty in the current approach, because >>>> it just reclaims "automatically" once possible -- page table empty and >>>> nobody is walking it. The downside is that it doesn't always make sense >>>> to reclaim an empty page table immediately once it turns empty. >>>> >>>> Also, it adds complexity for something that is only a problem in some >>>> corner cases -- sparse memory mappings, especially relevant for some >>>> memory allocators after freeing a lot of memory or running VMs with >>>> memory ballooning after inflating the balloon. Some of these use cases >>>> might be good with just triggering page table reclaim manually from user >>>> space. >>>> >>> >>> Yes, this is indeed a problem. Perhaps some flags can be introduced so >>> that the release of page table pages can be delayed in some cases. >>> Similar to the lazyfree mechanism in MADV_FREE? >> >> The issue AFAIU is that once your refcount hits 0 (no more references, >> no more entries), the longer you wait with reclaim, the longer others >> have to wait for populating a fresh page table because the "page table >> to be reclaimed" is still stuck around. You'd have to keep the refcount >> increased for a while, and only drop it after a while. But when? And >> how? IMHO it's not trivial, but maybe there is an easy way to achieve it. >> > > For running VMs with memory ballooning after inflating the balloon, is > this a hot behavior? Even if it is, it is already facing the release and > reallocation of physical pages. The overhead after introducing > pte_refcount is that we need to release and re-allocate page table page. > But 2MB physical pages only corresponds to 4KiB of PTE page table page. > So maybe the overhead is not big. The cases that come to my mind are a) Swapping on shared memory with concurrent access b) Reclaim on file-backed memory with concurrent access c) Free page reporting as implemented by virtio-balloon In all of these cases, you can have someone immediately re-access the page table and re-populate it. For something mostly static (balloon inflation, memory allocator), it's not that big of a deal I guess. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb