From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joel Fernandes Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm: speed up mremap by 500x on large regions (v2) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2018 12:39:17 -0700 Message-ID: <20181027193917.GA51131@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> References: <20181013013200.206928-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20181013013200.206928-3-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20181024101255.it4lptrjogalxbey@kshutemo-mobl1> <20181024115733.GN8537@350D> <20181025021350.GB13560@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> <20181027102102.GO8537@350D> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Rich Felker , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Catalin Marinas , Dave Hansen , Will Deacon , mhocko@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, lokeshgidra@google.com, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, elfring@users.sourceforge.net, Jonas Bonn , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, dancol@google.com, Yoshinori Sato , linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Helge Deller , "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE \(32-BIT AND 64-BIT\)" , hughd@google.com, "James E.J. Bottomley" , kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, anton.ivanov@kot-begemot.co.uk, Ingo Molnar , Geert Uy To: Balbir Singh Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20181027102102.GO8537@350D> List-Id: Linux on Synopsys ARC Processors List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linux-snps-arc-bounces+gla-linux-snps-arc=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Balbir, On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 09:21:02PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 07:13:50PM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 10:57:33PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote: > > [...] > > > > > + pmd_t pmd; > > > > > + > > > > > + new_ptl = pmd_lockptr(mm, new_pmd); > > > > > > > > > Looks like this is largely inspired by move_huge_pmd(), I guess a lot of > > > the code applies, why not just reuse as much as possible? The same comments > > > w.r.t mmap_sem helping protect against lock order issues applies as well. > > > > I thought about this and when I looked into it, it seemed there are subtle > > differences that make such sharing not worth it (or not possible). > > > > Could you elaborate on them? The move_huge_page function is defined only for CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE so we cannot reuse it to begin with, since we have it disabled on our systems. I am not sure if it is a good idea to split that out and refactor it for reuse especially since our case is quite simple compared to huge pages. There are also a couple of subtle differences between the move_normal_pmd and the move_huge_pmd. Atleast 2 of them are: 1. We don't concern ourself with the PMD dirty bit, since the pages being moved are normal pages and at the soft-dirty bit accounting is at the PTE level, since we are not moving PTEs, we don't need to do that. 2. The locking is simpler as Kirill pointed, pmd_lock cannot fail however __pmd_trans_huge_lock can. I feel it is not super useful to refactor move_huge_pmd to support our case especially since move_normal_pmd is quite small, so IMHO the benefit of code reuse isn't there very much. Do let me know your thoughts and thanks for your interest in this. thanks, - Joel