From: Hugh Dickins <email@example.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <email@example.com>,
Andrew Morton <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Shakeel Butt <email@example.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Yang Shi <email@example.com>,
Miaohe Lin <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Mike Kravetz <email@example.com>,
Michal Hocko <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Rik van Riel <email@example.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <email@example.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Alexey Gladkov <email@example.com>,
Chris Wilson <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Matthew Auld <email@example.com>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/16] huge tmpfs: fcntl(fd, F_HUGEPAGE) and fcntl(fd, F_NOHUGEPAGE)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 21:34:20 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw)
On Wed, 4 Aug 2021, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 12:48:33AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > Add support for fcntl(fd, F_HUGEPAGE) and fcntl(fd, F_NOHUGEPAGE), to
> > select hugeness per file: useful to override the default hugeness of the
> > shmem mount, when occasionally needing to store a hugepage file in a
> > smallpage mount or vice versa.
> Hm. But why is the new MFD_* needed if the fcntl() can do the same.
That I've just addressed in the MFD_HUGEPAGE 07/16 thread.
> > These fcntls just specify whether or not to try for huge pages when
> > allocating to the object later: F_HUGEPAGE does not touch small pages
> > already allocated (though khugepaged may do so when the file is mapped
> > afterwards), F_NOHUGEPAGE does not split huge pages already allocated.
> > Why fcntl? Because it's already in use (for sealing) on memfds; and I'm
> > anxious to keep this simple, just applying it to whole files: fallocate,
> > madvise and posix_fadvise each involve a range, which would need a new
> > kind of tree attached to the inode for proper support.
> Most of fadvise() operations ignore the range. I like fadvise() because
> it's less prescriptive: kernel is free to ignore it.
As to ignoring the range, yes, I see now that some do; and I'm relieved
to see "Len == 0 means as much as possible", that's great, I was afraid
of compat bugs over 0xffy numbers for the len. And we would want, not
to ignore the range, but insist on offset 0, len 0 for now, if there's
any intention (not mine) of extending it to ranges in the future.
As to ignoring the prescription, that's just a matter of how we describe
it in the manpage, no matter whether it's fadvise() or fcntl().
And in the 07/16 thread you also said:
> If a tunable needed, I would rather go with fadvise(). It would operate on
> a couple of bits per struct file and they get translated into VM_HUGEPAGE
> and VM_NOHUGEPAGE on mmap().
Not so sure about that detail: the point here is to decide what kind
of allocations to try for, before the file is mmap()ed; and it is the
file (the underlying object) that I want to condition here, rather than
the struct file of who has it open at the time, or their mmap()s.
But adding the flags into the vm_flags on mmap(): that's an interesting
idea, I haven't played with that at all. Offhand, I don't think it will
give different allocation results from what I'm already doing, but might
affect what is shown by default in /proc/<pid>/smaps.
> Later if needed fadvise() implementation may be extended to track
> requested ranges. But initially it can be simple.
I still prefer fcntl() myself, but we can go with either: what I'd
like to hear is the preference of linux-fsdevel and linux-api people.
Aside from the unused offset+len, my main problem with fadvise()
is that... it doesn't exist. It's posix_fadvise() or fadvise64() or
fadvise64_64(), and all its good advices are POSIX_MADV_whatever.
Are we comfortable now adding LINUX_MADV_HUGEPAGE, LINUX_MADV_NOHUGEPAGE?
I find myself singing 64 64 Zoo Lane.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-06 4:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-30 7:22 [PATCH 00/16] tmpfs: HUGEPAGE and MEM_LOCK fcntls and memfds Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 7:25 ` [PATCH 01/16] huge tmpfs: fix fallocate(vanilla) advance over huge pages Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 21:36 ` Yang Shi
2021-08-01 3:38 ` Hugh Dickins
2021-08-02 20:36 ` Yang Shi
2021-07-30 7:28 ` [PATCH 02/16] huge tmpfs: fix split_huge_page() after FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 23:48 ` Yang Shi
2021-07-30 7:30 ` [PATCH 03/16] huge tmpfs: remove shrinklist addition from shmem_setattr() Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 21:50 ` Yang Shi
2021-07-30 7:36 ` [PATCH 04/16] huge tmpfs: revert shmem's use of transhuge_vma_enabled() Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 21:56 ` Yang Shi
2021-08-01 4:01 ` Hugh Dickins
2021-08-02 20:39 ` Yang Shi
2021-07-30 7:39 ` [PATCH 05/16] huge tmpfs: move shmem_huge_enabled() upwards Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 21:57 ` Yang Shi
2021-07-30 7:42 ` [PATCH 06/16] huge tmpfs: shmem_is_huge(vma, inode, index) Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 23:34 ` Yang Shi
2021-08-01 5:22 ` Hugh Dickins
2021-08-01 5:37 ` Hugh Dickins
2021-08-02 21:14 ` Yang Shi
2021-08-04 8:28 ` Hugh Dickins
2021-08-04 19:01 ` Yang Shi
2021-08-06 5:21 ` Hugh Dickins
2021-08-06 17:41 ` Yang Shi
2021-08-05 23:04 ` Yang Shi
2021-08-06 5:43 ` Hugh Dickins
2021-08-06 17:57 ` Yang Shi
2021-08-12 18:19 ` Yang Shi
2021-07-30 7:45 ` [PATCH 07/16] memfd: memfd_create(name, MFD_HUGEPAGE) for shmem huge pages Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 12:01 ` kernel test robot
2021-08-04 14:03 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2021-08-06 3:33 ` Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 7:48 ` [PATCH 08/16] huge tmpfs: fcntl(fd, F_HUGEPAGE) and fcntl(fd, F_NOHUGEPAGE) Hugh Dickins
2021-08-04 14:08 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2021-08-06 4:34 ` Hugh Dickins [this message]
2021-07-30 7:51 ` [PATCH 09/16] huge tmpfs: decide stat.st_blksize by shmem_is_huge() Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 23:40 ` Yang Shi
2021-07-30 7:55 ` [PATCH 10/16] tmpfs: fcntl(fd, F_MEM_LOCK) to memlock a tmpfs file Hugh Dickins
2021-08-03 1:38 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-08-04 9:15 ` Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 7:57 ` [PATCH 11/16] tmpfs: fcntl(fd, F_MEM_LOCKED) to test if memlocked Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 8:00 ` [PATCH 12/16] tmpfs: refuse memlock when fallocated beyond i_size Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 8:03 ` [PATCH 13/16] mm: bool user_shm_lock(loff_t size, struct ucounts *) Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 8:06 ` [PATCH 14/16] mm: user_shm_lock(,,getuc) and user_shm_unlock(,,putuc) Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 8:09 ` [PATCH 15/16] tmpfs: permit changing size of memlocked file Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 8:13 ` [PATCH 16/16] memfd: memfd_create(name, MFD_MEM_LOCK) for memlocked shmem Hugh Dickins
2021-07-30 11:24 ` kernel test robot
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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).