From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: "Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>
Cc: "Linux MM" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"Jan Kara" <jack@suse.cz>,
"Felix Kuehling" <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>,
"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@mellanox.com>,
"Matthew Wilcox" <mawilcox@microsoft.com>,
"Ross Zwisler" <zwisler@kernel.org>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
"Ralph Campbell" <rcampbell@nvidia.com>,
"John Hubbard" <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
"KVM list" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"Maling list - DRI developers" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
linux-rdma <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] mmu notifier provide context informations
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 14:54:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4i9_T9779ZyaYt2T3b20-wQTaWA4P63+49TM=a=twtDVw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190123222315.1122-1-jglisse@redhat.com>
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 2:23 PM <jglisse@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> From: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
>
> Hi Andrew, i see that you still have my event patch in you queue [1].
> This patchset replace that single patch and is broken down in further
> step so that it is easier to review and ascertain that no mistake were
> made during mechanical changes. Here are the step:
>
> Patch 1 - add the enum values
> Patch 2 - coccinelle semantic patch to convert all call site of
> mmu_notifier_range_init to default enum value and also
> to passing down the vma when it is available
> Patch 3 - update many call site to more accurate enum values
> Patch 4 - add the information to the mmu_notifier_range struct
> Patch 5 - helper to test if a range is updated to read only
>
> All the remaining patches are update to various driver to demonstrate
> how this new information get use by device driver. I build tested
> with make all and make all minus everything that enable mmu notifier
> ie building with MMU_NOTIFIER=no. Also tested with some radeon,amd
> gpu and intel gpu.
>
> If they are no objections i believe best plan would be to merge the
> the first 5 patches (all mm changes) through your queue for 5.1 and
> then to delay driver update to each individual driver tree for 5.2.
> This will allow each individual device driver maintainer time to more
> thouroughly test this more then my own testing.
>
> Note that i also intend to use this feature further in nouveau and
> HMM down the road. I also expect that other user like KVM might be
> interested into leveraging this new information to optimize some of
> there secondary page table invalidation.
"Down the road" users should introduce the functionality they want to
consume. The common concern with preemptively including
forward-looking infrastructure is realizing later that the
infrastructure is not needed, or needs changing. If it has no current
consumer, leave it out.
>
> Here is an explaination on the rational for this patchset:
>
>
> CPU page table update can happens for many reasons, not only as a result
> of a syscall (munmap(), mprotect(), mremap(), madvise(), ...) but also
> as a result of kernel activities (memory compression, reclaim, migration,
> ...).
>
> This patch introduce a set of enums that can be associated with each of
> the events triggering a mmu notifier. Latter patches take advantages of
> those enum values.
>
> - UNMAP: munmap() or mremap()
> - CLEAR: page table is cleared (migration, compaction, reclaim, ...)
> - PROTECTION_VMA: change in access protections for the range
> - PROTECTION_PAGE: change in access protections for page in the range
> - SOFT_DIRTY: soft dirtyness tracking
>
> Being able to identify munmap() and mremap() from other reasons why the
> page table is cleared is important to allow user of mmu notifier to
> update their own internal tracking structure accordingly (on munmap or
> mremap it is not longer needed to track range of virtual address as it
> becomes invalid).
The only context information consumed in this patch set is
MMU_NOTIFY_PROTECTION_VMA.
What is the practical benefit of these "optimize out the case when a
range is updated to read only" optimizations? Any numbers to show this
is worth the code thrash?
>
> [1] https://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/mm-mmu_notifier-contextual-information-for-event-triggering-invalidation-v2.patch
>
> Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> Cc: Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>
> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
> Cc: Ross Zwisler <zwisler@kernel.org>
> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
> Cc: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@nvidia.com>
> Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> Jérôme Glisse (9):
> mm/mmu_notifier: contextual information for event enums
> mm/mmu_notifier: contextual information for event triggering
> invalidation
> mm/mmu_notifier: use correct mmu_notifier events for each invalidation
> mm/mmu_notifier: pass down vma and reasons why mmu notifier is
> happening
> mm/mmu_notifier: mmu_notifier_range_update_to_read_only() helper
> gpu/drm/radeon: optimize out the case when a range is updated to read
> only
> gpu/drm/amdgpu: optimize out the case when a range is updated to read
> only
> gpu/drm/i915: optimize out the case when a range is updated to read
> only
> RDMA/umem_odp: optimize out the case when a range is updated to read
> only
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_mn.c | 13 ++++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_userptr.c | 16 ++++++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_mn.c | 13 ++++++++
> drivers/infiniband/core/umem_odp.c | 22 +++++++++++--
> fs/proc/task_mmu.c | 3 +-
> include/linux/mmu_notifier.h | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> include/rdma/ib_umem_odp.h | 1 +
> kernel/events/uprobes.c | 3 +-
> mm/huge_memory.c | 14 +++++----
> mm/hugetlb.c | 11 ++++---
> mm/khugepaged.c | 3 +-
> mm/ksm.c | 6 ++--
> mm/madvise.c | 3 +-
> mm/memory.c | 25 +++++++++------
> mm/migrate.c | 5 ++-
> mm/mmu_notifier.c | 10 ++++++
> mm/mprotect.c | 4 ++-
> mm/mremap.c | 3 +-
> mm/oom_kill.c | 3 +-
> mm/rmap.c | 6 ++--
> 20 files changed, 171 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.17.2
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-23 22:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-23 22:23 [PATCH v4 0/9] mmu notifier provide context informations jglisse
2019-01-23 22:23 ` [PATCH v4 1/9] mm/mmu_notifier: contextual information for event enums jglisse
2019-01-23 22:23 ` [PATCH v4 2/9] mm/mmu_notifier: contextual information for event triggering invalidation jglisse
2019-01-23 22:23 ` [PATCH v4 3/9] mm/mmu_notifier: use correct mmu_notifier events for each invalidation jglisse
2019-01-23 22:23 ` [PATCH v4 4/9] mm/mmu_notifier: pass down vma and reasons why mmu notifier is happening jglisse
2019-01-23 22:23 ` [PATCH v4 5/9] mm/mmu_notifier: mmu_notifier_range_update_to_read_only() helper jglisse
2019-01-23 22:23 ` [PATCH v4 6/9] gpu/drm/radeon: optimize out the case when a range is updated to read only jglisse
2019-01-23 22:23 ` [PATCH v4 7/9] gpu/drm/amdgpu: " jglisse
2019-01-23 22:23 ` [PATCH v4 8/9] gpu/drm/i915: " jglisse
2019-01-24 12:09 ` Joonas Lahtinen
2019-01-24 15:30 ` Jerome Glisse
[not found] ` <154877159986.4387.16328989441685542244@jlahtine-desk.ger.corp.intel.com>
2019-01-29 16:21 ` Jerome Glisse
2019-01-23 22:23 ` [PATCH v4 9/9] RDMA/umem_odp: " jglisse
2019-01-23 22:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2019-01-23 22:46 ` Jerome Glisse
2019-01-23 22:54 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2019-01-23 23:04 ` [PATCH v4 0/9] mmu notifier provide context informations Jerome Glisse
2019-01-24 0:00 ` Dan Williams
2019-01-31 16:10 ` Jerome Glisse
2019-01-31 19:55 ` Andrew Morton
2019-01-31 20:33 ` Jerome Glisse
2019-02-01 12:24 ` Christian König
2019-02-01 21:02 ` Jan Kara
2019-02-11 18:54 ` 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='CAPcyv4i9_T9779ZyaYt2T3b20-wQTaWA4P63+49TM=a=twtDVw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=Felix.Kuehling@amd.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jgg@mellanox.com \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mawilcox@microsoft.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rcampbell@nvidia.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=zwisler@kernel.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 NNTP newsgroup(s).