linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>,
	Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
	Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC 0/5] mm/autonuma: replace savedwrite infrastructure
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 17:26:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220926152618.194810-1-david@redhat.com> (raw)

As discussed in my talk at LPC, we can reuse the same mechanism for
deciding whether to map a pte writable when upgrading permissions via
mprotect() -- e.g., PROT_READ -> PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE -- to replace the
savedwrite infrastructure used for NUMA hinting faults (e.g., PROT_NONE
-> PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE). Instead of maintaining previous write permissions
for a pte/pmd, we re-determine if the pte/pmd can be writable.

The big benefit is that we have a common logic for deciding whether we can
map a pte/pmd writable on protection changes.

For private mappings, there should be no difference -- from
what I understand, that is what autonuma benchmarks care about.

I ran autonumabench on a system with 2 NUMA nodes, 96 GiB each via:
	perf stat --null --repeat 10

The numa1 benchmark is quite noisy in my environment. I suspect that there
is no actual change in performance, even though the numbers indicate that
this series might improve performance slightly.

numa1:
	mm-stable:   156.75 +- 11.67 seconds time elapsed  ( +-  7.44% )
	mm-stable++: 147.50 +- 9.35 seconds time elapsed  ( +-  6.34% )

numa2:
	mm-stable:   15.9834 +- 0.0589 seconds time elapsed  ( +-  0.37% )
	mm-stable++: 16.1467 +- 0.0946 seconds time elapsed  ( +-  0.59% )

It is worth noting that for shared writable mappings that require
writenotify, we will only avoid write faults if the pte/pmd is dirty
(inherited from the older mprotect logic). If we ever care about optimizing
that further, we'd need a different mechanism to identify whether the FS
still needs to get notified on the next write access. In any case, such an
optimiztion will then not be autonuma-specific, but mprotect() permission
upgrades would similarly benefit from it.

Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>

David Hildenbrand (4):
  mm/mprotect: minor can_change_pte_writable() cleanups
  mm/huge_memory: try avoiding write faults when changing PMD protection
  mm/autonuma: use can_change_(pte|pmd)_writable() to replace savedwrite
  mm: remove unused savedwrite infrastructure

Nadav Amit (1):
  mm/mprotect: allow clean exclusive anon pages to be writable

 arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h | 80 +-------------------
 arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_rm_mmu.c          |  2 +-
 include/linux/mm.h                           |  2 +
 include/linux/pgtable.h                      | 24 ------
 mm/debug_vm_pgtable.c                        | 32 --------
 mm/huge_memory.c                             | 66 ++++++++++++----
 mm/ksm.c                                     |  9 +--
 mm/memory.c                                  | 19 ++++-
 mm/mprotect.c                                | 23 +++---
 9 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 164 deletions(-)

-- 
2.37.3



             reply	other threads:[~2022-09-26 15:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-26 15:26 David Hildenbrand [this message]
2022-09-26 15:26 ` [PATCH RFC 1/5] mm/mprotect: allow clean exclusive anon pages to be writable David Hildenbrand
2022-09-26 15:26 ` [PATCH RFC 2/5] mm/mprotect: minor can_change_pte_writable() cleanups David Hildenbrand
2022-09-26 15:26 ` [PATCH RFC 3/5] mm/huge_memory: try avoiding write faults when changing PMD protection David Hildenbrand
2022-09-26 15:26 ` [PATCH RFC 4/5] mm/autonuma: use can_change_(pte|pmd)_writable() to replace savedwrite David Hildenbrand
2022-09-26 15:26 ` [PATCH RFC 5/5] mm: remove unused savedwrite infrastructure David Hildenbrand

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=20220926152618.194810-1-david@redhat.com \
    --to=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=namit@vmware.com \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /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).