From: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
To: James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Mina Almasry <almasrymina@google.com>, Jue Wang <juew@google.com>,
Manish Mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>,
"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 04/26] hugetlb: make huge_pte_lockptr take an explicit shift argument.
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:32:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <FA7A662E-B266-42A8-AC51-C063F260A386@bytedance.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADrL8HWuF-yXvgdJW7wWQSMU0GsRg3gttHykhV7=1VYSxfzkag@mail.gmail.com>
> On Jul 1, 2022, at 00:23, James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 2:35 AM Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 03:24:45PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>>> On 06/29/22 14:39, James Houghton wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 2:04 PM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 06/29/22 14:09, Muchun Song wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 01:51:53PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>>>>>>> On 06/24/22 17:36, James Houghton wrote:
>>>>>>>> This is needed to handle PTL locking with high-granularity mapping. We
>>>>>>>> won't always be using the PMD-level PTL even if we're using the 2M
>>>>>>>> hugepage hstate. It's possible that we're dealing with 4K PTEs, in which
>>>>>>>> case, we need to lock the PTL for the 4K PTE.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not really sure why this would be required.
>>>>>>> Why not use the PMD level lock for 4K PTEs? Seems that would scale better
>>>>>>> with less contention than using the more coarse mm lock.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your words make me thing of another question unrelated to this patch.
>>>>>> We __know__ that arm64 supports continues PTE HugeTLB. huge_pte_lockptr()
>>>>>> did not consider this case, in this case, those HugeTLB pages are contended
>>>>>> with mm lock. Seems we should optimize this case. Something like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/hugetlb.h b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
>>>>>> index 0d790fa3f297..68a1e071bfc0 100644
>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/hugetlb.h
>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
>>>>>> @@ -893,7 +893,7 @@ static inline gfp_t htlb_modify_alloc_mask(struct hstate *h, gfp_t gfp_mask)
>>>>>> static inline spinlock_t *huge_pte_lockptr(struct hstate *h,
>>>>>> struct mm_struct *mm, pte_t *pte)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> - if (huge_page_size(h) == PMD_SIZE)
>>>>>> + if (huge_page_size(h) <= PMD_SIZE)
>>>>>> return pmd_lockptr(mm, (pmd_t *) pte);
>>>>>> VM_BUG_ON(huge_page_size(h) == PAGE_SIZE);
>>>>>> return &mm->page_table_lock;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did not check if elsewhere needs to be changed as well. Just a primary
>>>>>> thought.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure if this works. If hugetlb_pte_size(hpte) is PAGE_SIZE,
>>>> then `hpte.ptep` will be a pte_t, not a pmd_t -- I assume that breaks
>>>> things. So I think, when doing a HugeTLB PT walk down to PAGE_SIZE, we
>>>> need to separately keep track of the location of the PMD so that we
>>>> can use it to get the PMD lock.
>>>
>>> I assume Muchun was talking about changing this in current code (before
>>> your changes) where huge_page_size(h) can not be PAGE_SIZE.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, that's what I meant.
>
> Right -- but I think my point still stands. If `huge_page_size(h)` is
> CONT_PTE_SIZE, then the `pte_t *` passed to `huge_pte_lockptr` will
> *actually* point to a `pte_t` and not a `pmd_t` (I'm pretty sure the
Right. It is a pte in this case.
> distinction is important). So it seems like we need to separately keep
> track of the real pmd_t that is being used in the CONT_PTE_SIZE case
If we want to find pmd_t from pte_t, I think we can introduce a new field
in struct page just like the thread [1] does.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211110105428.32458-7-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com/
> (and therefore, when considering HGM, the PAGE_SIZE case).
>
> However, we *can* make this optimization for CONT_PMD_SIZE (maybe this
> is what you originally meant, Muchun?), so instead of
> `huge_page_size(h) == PMD_SIZE`, we could do `huge_page_size(h) >=
> PMD_SIZE && huge_page_size(h) < PUD_SIZE`.
Right. It is a good start to optimize CONT_PMD_SIZE case.
Thanks.
>
>>
>> Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-01 3:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 123+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-24 17:36 [RFC PATCH 00/26] hugetlb: Introduce HugeTLB high-granularity mapping James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 01/26] hugetlb: make hstate accessor functions const James Houghton
2022-06-24 18:43 ` Mina Almasry
[not found] ` <e55f90f5-ba14-5d6e-8f8f-abf731b9095e@nutanix.com>
[not found] ` <bb903be9-546d-04a7-e9e4-f5ba313319de@nutanix.com>
2022-06-28 17:08 ` James Houghton
2022-06-29 6:18 ` Muchun Song
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 02/26] hugetlb: sort hstates in hugetlb_init_hstates James Houghton
2022-06-24 18:51 ` Mina Almasry
2022-06-27 12:08 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-28 15:35 ` James Houghton
2022-06-27 18:42 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-06-28 15:40 ` James Houghton
2022-06-29 6:39 ` Muchun Song
2022-06-29 21:06 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-06-29 21:13 ` James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 03/26] hugetlb: add make_huge_pte_with_shift James Houghton
2022-06-24 19:01 ` Mina Almasry
2022-06-27 12:13 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 04/26] hugetlb: make huge_pte_lockptr take an explicit shift argument James Houghton
2022-06-27 12:26 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-27 20:51 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-06-28 15:29 ` James Houghton
2022-06-29 6:09 ` Muchun Song
2022-06-29 21:03 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-06-29 21:39 ` James Houghton
2022-06-29 22:24 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-06-30 9:35 ` Muchun Song
2022-06-30 16:23 ` James Houghton
2022-06-30 17:40 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-07-01 3:32 ` Muchun Song [this message]
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 05/26] hugetlb: add CONFIG_HUGETLB_HIGH_GRANULARITY_MAPPING James Houghton
2022-06-27 12:28 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-28 20:03 ` Mina Almasry
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 06/26] mm: make free_p?d_range functions public James Houghton
2022-06-27 12:31 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-28 20:35 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-07-12 20:52 ` James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 07/26] hugetlb: add hugetlb_pte to track HugeTLB page table entries James Houghton
2022-06-27 12:47 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-29 16:28 ` James Houghton
2022-06-28 20:25 ` Mina Almasry
2022-06-29 16:42 ` James Houghton
2022-06-28 20:44 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-06-29 16:24 ` James Houghton
2022-07-11 23:32 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-07-12 9:42 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2022-07-12 17:51 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-07-15 16:35 ` Peter Xu
2022-07-15 21:52 ` Axel Rasmussen
2022-07-15 23:03 ` Peter Xu
2022-09-08 17:38 ` Peter Xu
2022-09-08 17:54 ` James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 08/26] hugetlb: add hugetlb_free_range to free PT structures James Houghton
2022-06-27 12:52 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-28 20:27 ` Mina Almasry
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 09/26] hugetlb: add hugetlb_hgm_enabled James Houghton
2022-06-28 20:33 ` Mina Almasry
2022-09-08 18:07 ` Peter Xu
2022-09-08 18:13 ` James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 10/26] hugetlb: add for_each_hgm_shift James Houghton
2022-06-27 13:01 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-28 21:58 ` Mina Almasry
2022-07-07 21:39 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-07-08 15:52 ` James Houghton
2022-07-09 21:55 ` Mina Almasry
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 11/26] hugetlb: add hugetlb_walk_to to do PT walks James Houghton
2022-06-27 13:07 ` manish.mishra
2022-07-07 23:03 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-09-08 18:20 ` Peter Xu
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 12/26] hugetlb: add HugeTLB splitting functionality James Houghton
2022-06-27 13:50 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-29 16:10 ` James Houghton
2022-06-29 14:33 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-29 16:20 ` James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 13/26] hugetlb: add huge_pte_alloc_high_granularity James Houghton
2022-06-29 14:11 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 14/26] hugetlb: add HGM support for hugetlb_fault and hugetlb_no_page James Houghton
2022-06-29 14:40 ` manish.mishra
2022-06-29 15:56 ` James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 15/26] hugetlb: make unmapping compatible with high-granularity mappings James Houghton
2022-07-19 10:19 ` manish.mishra
2022-07-19 15:58 ` James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 16/26] hugetlb: make hugetlb_change_protection compatible with HGM James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 17/26] hugetlb: update follow_hugetlb_page to support HGM James Houghton
2022-07-19 10:48 ` manish.mishra
2022-07-19 16:19 ` James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 18/26] hugetlb: use struct hugetlb_pte for walk_hugetlb_range James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 19/26] hugetlb: add HGM support for copy_hugetlb_page_range James Houghton
2022-07-11 23:41 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-07-12 17:19 ` James Houghton
2022-07-12 18:06 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-07-15 21:39 ` Axel Rasmussen
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 20/26] hugetlb: add support for high-granularity UFFDIO_CONTINUE James Houghton
2022-07-15 16:21 ` Peter Xu
2022-07-15 16:58 ` James Houghton
2022-07-15 17:20 ` Peter Xu
2022-07-20 20:58 ` James Houghton
2022-07-21 19:09 ` Peter Xu
2022-07-21 19:44 ` James Houghton
2022-07-21 19:53 ` Peter Xu
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 21/26] hugetlb: add hugetlb_collapse James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 22/26] madvise: add uapi for HugeTLB HGM collapse: MADV_COLLAPSE James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 23/26] userfaultfd: add UFFD_FEATURE_MINOR_HUGETLBFS_HGM James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 24/26] arm64/hugetlb: add support for high-granularity mappings James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 25/26] selftests: add HugeTLB HGM to userfaultfd selftest James Houghton
2022-06-24 17:36 ` [RFC PATCH 26/26] selftests: add HugeTLB HGM to KVM demand paging selftest James Houghton
2022-06-24 18:29 ` [RFC PATCH 00/26] hugetlb: Introduce HugeTLB high-granularity mapping Matthew Wilcox
2022-06-27 16:36 ` James Houghton
2022-06-27 17:56 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2022-06-27 20:31 ` James Houghton
2022-06-28 0:04 ` Nadav Amit
2022-06-30 19:21 ` Peter Xu
2022-07-01 5:54 ` Nadav Amit
2022-06-28 8:20 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2022-06-30 16:09 ` Peter Xu
2022-06-24 18:41 ` Mina Almasry
2022-06-27 16:27 ` James Houghton
2022-06-28 14:17 ` Muchun Song
2022-06-28 17:26 ` Mina Almasry
2022-06-28 17:56 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2022-06-29 18:31 ` James Houghton
2022-06-29 20:39 ` Axel Rasmussen
2022-06-24 18:47 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-06-27 16:48 ` James Houghton
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=FA7A662E-B266-42A8-AC51-C063F260A386@bytedance.com \
--to=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
--cc=almasrymina@google.com \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=jthoughton@google.com \
--cc=juew@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=manish.mishra@nutanix.com \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.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).