From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com> To: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>, "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>, Chintan Pandya <cpandya@codeaurora.org>, Jun Yao <yaojun8558363@gmail.com>, Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] arm64: mm: use appropriate ctors for page tables Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 13:15:55 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <b0ae4f65-aa0f-148a-eced-0d9831a7bf01@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190310011906.254635-1-yuzhao@google.com> Hello Yu, We had some disagreements over this series last time around after which I had posted the following series [1] which tried to enable ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK after doing some pgtable accounting changes. After some thoughts and deliberations I figure that its better not to do pgtable alloc changes on arm64 creating a brand new semantics which ideally should be first debated and agreed upon in generic MM. Though I still see value in a changed generic pgtable page allocation semantics for user and kernel space that should not stop us from enabling more granular PMD level locks through ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK right now. [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg709917.html Having said that this series attempts to enable ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK with some minimal changes to existing kernel pgtable page allocation code. Hence just trying to re-evaluate the series in that isolation. On 03/10/2019 06:49 AM, Yu Zhao wrote: > For pte page, use pgtable_page_ctor(); for pmd page, use > pgtable_pmd_page_ctor(); and for the rest (pud, p4d and pgd), > don't use any. This is semantics change. Hence the question is why ? Should not we wait until a generic MM agreement in place in this regard ? Can we avoid this ? Is the change really required to enable ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK for user space THP which this series originally intended to achieve ? > > For now, we don't select ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK and > pgtable_pmd_page_ctor() is a nop. When we do in patch 3, we > make sure pmd is not folded so we won't mistakenly call > pgtable_pmd_page_ctor() on pud or p4d. This makes sense from code perspective but I still dont understand the need to change kernel pgtable page allocation semantics without any real benefit or fix at the moment. Cant we keep kernel page table page allocation unchanged for now and just enable ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK for user space THP benefits ? Do you see any concern with that.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com> To: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, Jun Yao <yaojun8558363@gmail.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org, "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Chintan Pandya <cpandya@codeaurora.org>, Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>, "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] arm64: mm: use appropriate ctors for page tables Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 13:15:55 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <b0ae4f65-aa0f-148a-eced-0d9831a7bf01@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190310011906.254635-1-yuzhao@google.com> Hello Yu, We had some disagreements over this series last time around after which I had posted the following series [1] which tried to enable ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK after doing some pgtable accounting changes. After some thoughts and deliberations I figure that its better not to do pgtable alloc changes on arm64 creating a brand new semantics which ideally should be first debated and agreed upon in generic MM. Though I still see value in a changed generic pgtable page allocation semantics for user and kernel space that should not stop us from enabling more granular PMD level locks through ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK right now. [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg709917.html Having said that this series attempts to enable ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK with some minimal changes to existing kernel pgtable page allocation code. Hence just trying to re-evaluate the series in that isolation. On 03/10/2019 06:49 AM, Yu Zhao wrote: > For pte page, use pgtable_page_ctor(); for pmd page, use > pgtable_pmd_page_ctor(); and for the rest (pud, p4d and pgd), > don't use any. This is semantics change. Hence the question is why ? Should not we wait until a generic MM agreement in place in this regard ? Can we avoid this ? Is the change really required to enable ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK for user space THP which this series originally intended to achieve ? > > For now, we don't select ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK and > pgtable_pmd_page_ctor() is a nop. When we do in patch 3, we > make sure pmd is not folded so we won't mistakenly call > pgtable_pmd_page_ctor() on pud or p4d. This makes sense from code perspective but I still dont understand the need to change kernel pgtable page allocation semantics without any real benefit or fix at the moment. Cant we keep kernel page table page allocation unchanged for now and just enable ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK for user space THP benefits ? Do you see any concern with that. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-11 7:46 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 120+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-02-14 21:16 [PATCH] arm64: mm: enable per pmd page table lock Yu Zhao 2019-02-14 21:16 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-18 15:12 ` Will Deacon 2019-02-18 15:12 ` Will Deacon 2019-02-18 19:49 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-18 19:49 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-18 20:48 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-18 20:48 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-19 4:09 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-19 4:09 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-18 23:13 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: mm: use appropriate ctors for page tables Yu Zhao 2019-02-18 23:13 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-18 23:13 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: mm: don't call page table ctors for init_mm Yu Zhao 2019-02-18 23:13 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-26 15:13 ` Mark Rutland 2019-02-26 15:13 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-09 3:52 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-09 3:52 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-18 23:13 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: mm: enable per pmd page table lock Yu Zhao 2019-02-18 23:13 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-19 4:21 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: mm: use appropriate ctors for page tables Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-19 4:21 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-19 5:32 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-19 5:32 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-19 6:17 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-19 6:17 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-19 22:28 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-19 22:28 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-20 10:27 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-20 10:27 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-20 12:24 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 12:24 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 20:22 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-20 20:22 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-20 20:59 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 20:59 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 20:59 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 1:34 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 1:34 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 1:34 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 3:20 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-20 3:20 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-20 21:03 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 21:03 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-20 21:03 ` Matthew Wilcox 2019-02-26 15:12 ` Mark Rutland 2019-02-26 15:12 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-09 4:01 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-09 4:01 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-09 4:01 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-10 1:19 ` [PATCH v3 " Yu Zhao 2019-03-10 1:19 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-10 1:19 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-10 1:19 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] arm64: mm: don't call page table ctors for init_mm Yu Zhao 2019-03-10 1:19 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-10 1:19 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-10 1:19 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64: mm: enable per pmd page table lock Yu Zhao 2019-03-10 1:19 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-10 1:19 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-11 8:28 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-11 8:28 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-11 23:10 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-11 23:10 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-11 12:12 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-11 12:12 ` Mark Rutland 2019-03-11 12:57 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-11 12:57 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-11 23:11 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-11 23:11 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-11 23:11 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-11 7:45 ` Anshuman Khandual [this message] 2019-03-11 7:45 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] arm64: mm: use appropriate ctors for page tables Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-11 23:23 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-11 23:23 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] " Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] arm64: mm: don't call page table ctors for init_mm Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] arm64: mm: call ctor for stage2 pmd page Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 2:19 ` [PATCH] KVM: ARM: Remove pgtable page standard functions from stage-2 page tables Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-12 2:19 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-12 2:40 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 2:40 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 10:37 ` Suzuki K Poulose 2019-03-12 10:37 ` Suzuki K Poulose 2019-03-12 11:31 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-12 11:31 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-12 11:43 ` Suzuki K Poulose 2019-03-12 11:43 ` Suzuki K Poulose 2019-03-12 13:25 ` [PATCH V2] " Anshuman Khandual 2019-03-12 13:25 ` Anshuman Khandual 2019-04-01 16:16 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-01 16:16 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-01 16:16 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-01 18:34 ` Yu Zhao 2019-04-01 18:34 ` Yu Zhao 2019-04-01 18:34 ` Yu Zhao 2019-04-02 9:03 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-02 9:03 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-02 9:03 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-08 14:22 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-08 14:22 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-08 14:22 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-08 14:22 ` Will Deacon 2019-04-08 17:18 ` Yu Zhao 2019-04-08 17:18 ` Yu Zhao 2019-04-08 17:18 ` Yu Zhao 2019-04-08 9:09 ` Marc Zyngier 2019-04-08 9:09 ` Marc Zyngier 2019-04-08 9:09 ` Marc Zyngier 2019-04-08 9:09 ` Marc Zyngier 2019-03-12 0:57 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] arm64: mm: enable per pmd page table lock Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` Yu Zhao 2019-03-12 0:57 ` Yu Zhao 2019-02-19 3:08 ` [PATCH] " Anshuman Khandual 2019-02-19 3:08 ` Anshuman Khandual
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=b0ae4f65-aa0f-148a-eced-0d9831a7bf01@arm.com \ --to=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \ --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=cpandya@codeaurora.org \ --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \ --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \ --cc=labbott@redhat.com \ --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \ --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \ --cc=yaojun8558363@gmail.com \ --cc=yuzhao@google.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: linkBe 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.