From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
will@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, ziy@nvidia.com,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Suzuki Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC V2 1/2] arm64/mm: Change THP helpers per generic memory semantics
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 13:11:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200702121135.GD22241@gaia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1592226918-26378-2-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
Hi Anshuman,
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 06:45:17PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> @@ -353,15 +353,92 @@ static inline int pmd_protnone(pmd_t pmd)
> }
> #endif
>
> +#define pmd_table(pmd) ((pmd_val(pmd) & PMD_TYPE_MASK) == PMD_TYPE_TABLE)
> +#define pmd_sect(pmd) ((pmd_val(pmd) & PMD_TYPE_MASK) == PMD_TYPE_SECT)
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> /*
> - * THP definitions.
> + * PMD Level Encoding (THP Enabled)
> + *
> + * 0b00 - Not valid Not present NA
> + * 0b10 - Not valid Present Huge (Splitting)
> + * 0b01 - Valid Present Huge (Mapped)
> + * 0b11 - Valid Present Table (Mapped)
> */
I wonder whether it would be easier to read if we add a dedicated
PMD_SPLITTING bit, only when bit 0 is cleared. This bit can be high (say
59), it doesn't really matter as the entry is not valid.
The only doubt I have is that pmd_mkinvalid() is used in other contexts
when it's not necessarily splitting a pmd (search for the
pmdp_invalidate() calls). So maybe a better name like PMD_PRESENT with a
comment that pmd_to_page() is valid (i.e. no migration or swap entry).
Feel free to suggest a better name.
> +static inline pmd_t pmd_mksplitting(pmd_t pmd)
> +{
> + unsigned long val = pmd_val(pmd);
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> -#define pmd_trans_huge(pmd) (pmd_val(pmd) && !(pmd_val(pmd) & PMD_TABLE_BIT))
> + return __pmd((val & ~PMD_TYPE_MASK) | PMD_TABLE_BIT);
> +}
> +
> +static inline pmd_t pmd_clrsplitting(pmd_t pmd)
> +{
> + unsigned long val = pmd_val(pmd);
> +
> + return __pmd((val & ~PMD_TYPE_MASK) | PMD_TYPE_SECT);
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool pmd_splitting(pmd_t pmd)
> +{
> + unsigned long val = pmd_val(pmd);
> +
> + if ((val & PMD_TYPE_MASK) == PMD_TABLE_BIT)
> + return true;
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool pmd_mapped(pmd_t pmd)
> +{
> + return pmd_sect(pmd);
> +}
> +
> +static inline pmd_t pmd_mkinvalid(pmd_t pmd)
> +{
> + /*
> + * Invalidation should not have been invoked on
> + * a PMD table entry. Just warn here otherwise.
> + */
> + WARN_ON(pmd_table(pmd));
> + return pmd_mksplitting(pmd);
> +}
And here we wouldn't need t worry about table checks.
> +static inline int pmd_present(pmd_t pmd);
> +
> +static inline int pmd_trans_huge(pmd_t pmd)
> +{
> + if (!pmd_present(pmd))
> + return 0;
> +
> + if (!pmd_val(pmd))
> + return 0;
> +
> + if (pmd_mapped(pmd))
> + return 1;
> +
> + if (pmd_splitting(pmd))
> + return 1;
> + return 0;
Doesn't your new pmd_present() already check for splitting? I think
checking for bit 0 and the new PMD_PRESENT. That would be similar to
what we do with PTE_PROT_NONE. Actually, you could use the same bit for
both.
> +}
> +
> +void set_pmd_at(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> + pmd_t *pmdp, pmd_t pmd);
> #endif /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */
>
> -#define pmd_present(pmd) pte_present(pmd_pte(pmd))
> +static inline int pmd_present(pmd_t pmd)
> +{
> + pte_t pte = pmd_pte(pmd);
> +
> + if (pte_present(pte))
> + return 1;
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> + if (pmd_splitting(pmd))
> + return 1;
> +#endif
> + return 0;
> +}
[...]
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> index 990929c8837e..337519031115 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@
> #include <linux/io.h>
> #include <linux/mm.h>
> #include <linux/vmalloc.h>
> +#include <linux/swap.h>
> +#include <linux/swapops.h>
>
> #include <asm/barrier.h>
> #include <asm/cputype.h>
> @@ -1483,3 +1485,21 @@ static int __init prevent_bootmem_remove_init(void)
> }
> device_initcall(prevent_bootmem_remove_init);
> #endif
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> +void set_pmd_at(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> + pmd_t *pmdp, pmd_t pmd)
> +{
> + /*
> + * PMD migration entries need to retain splitting PMD
> + * representation created with pmdp_invalidate(). But
> + * any non-migration entry which just might have been
> + * invalidated previously, still need be a normal huge
> + * page. Hence selectively clear splitting entries.
> + */
> + if (!is_migration_entry(pmd_to_swp_entry(pmd)))
> + pmd = pmd_clrsplitting(pmd);
> +
> + set_pte_at(mm, addr, (pte_t *)pmdp, pmd_pte(pmd));
> +}
> +#endif
So a pmdp_invalidate() returns the old pmd. Do we ever need to rebuild a
pmd based on the actual bits in the new invalidated pmdp? Wondering how
the table bit ends up here that we need to pmd_clrsplitting().
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-02 12:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-15 13:15 [RFC V2 0/2] arm64/mm: Enable THP migration Anshuman Khandual
2020-06-15 13:15 ` [RFC V2 1/2] arm64/mm: Change THP helpers per generic memory semantics Anshuman Khandual
2020-07-02 12:11 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2020-07-06 3:57 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-07-07 17:44 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-08-17 5:43 ` Anshuman Khandual
2020-06-15 13:15 ` [RFC V2 2/2] arm64/mm: Enable THP migration 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=20200702121135.GD22241@gaia \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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 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).