linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: "Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" <kernel@pankajraghav.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	mcgrof@kernel.org, gost.dev@samsung.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, kbusch@kernel.org, djwong@kernel.org,
	chandan.babu@oracle.com, p.raghav@samsung.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hare@suse.de, willy@infradead.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 02/14] filemap: align the index to mapping_min_order in the page cache
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 09:00:46 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZcvmjthSu0TNkf8z@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240213093713.1753368-3-kernel@pankajraghav.com>

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 10:37:01AM +0100, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote:
> From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> 
> Supporting mapping_min_order implies that we guarantee each folio in the
> page cache has at least an order of mapping_min_order. So when adding new
> folios to the page cache we must ensure the index used is aligned to the
> mapping_min_order as the page cache requires the index to be aligned to
> the order of the folio.
> 
> A higher order folio than min_order by definition is a multiple of the
> min_order. If an index is aligned to an order higher than a min_order, it
> will also be aligned to the min order.
> 
> This effectively introduces no new functional changes when min order is
> not set other than a few rounding computations that should result in the
> same value.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
> ---
>  mm/filemap.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index 750e779c23db..323a8e169581 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -2479,14 +2479,16 @@ static int filemap_get_pages(struct kiocb *iocb, size_t count,
>  {
>  	struct file *filp = iocb->ki_filp;
>  	struct address_space *mapping = filp->f_mapping;
> +	unsigned int min_nrpages = mapping_min_folio_nrpages(mapping);
>  	struct file_ra_state *ra = &filp->f_ra;
> -	pgoff_t index = iocb->ki_pos >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> +	pgoff_t index = round_down(iocb->ki_pos >> PAGE_SHIFT, min_nrpages);

This is pretty magic - this patch adds a bunch of what appear to be
random rounding operations for some undocumented reason.

>  	pgoff_t last_index;
>  	struct folio *folio;
>  	int err = 0;
>  
>  	/* "last_index" is the index of the page beyond the end of the read */
>  	last_index = DIV_ROUND_UP(iocb->ki_pos + count, PAGE_SIZE);
> +	last_index = round_up(last_index, min_nrpages);

Same here - this is pretty nasty - we round up twice, but no obvious
reason as to why the second round up exists or why it can't be done
by the DIV_ROUND_UP() call. Just looking at the code it's impossible
to reason why this is being done, let alone determine if it has been
implemented correctly.

>  retry:
>  	if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
>  		return -EINTR;
> @@ -2502,8 +2504,7 @@ static int filemap_get_pages(struct kiocb *iocb, size_t count,
>  	if (!folio_batch_count(fbatch)) {
>  		if (iocb->ki_flags & (IOCB_NOWAIT | IOCB_WAITQ))
>  			return -EAGAIN;
> -		err = filemap_create_folio(filp, mapping,
> -				iocb->ki_pos >> PAGE_SHIFT, fbatch);
> +		err = filemap_create_folio(filp, mapping, index, fbatch);
>  		if (err == AOP_TRUNCATED_PAGE)
>  			goto retry;
>  		return err;
> @@ -3095,7 +3096,10 @@ static struct file *do_sync_mmap_readahead(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>  	struct file *file = vmf->vma->vm_file;
>  	struct file_ra_state *ra = &file->f_ra;
>  	struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
> -	DEFINE_READAHEAD(ractl, file, ra, mapping, vmf->pgoff);
> +	unsigned int min_order = mapping_min_folio_order(mapping);
> +	unsigned int min_nrpages = mapping_min_folio_nrpages(file->f_mapping);

Why use file->f_mapping here and not mapping? And why not just

	unsigned int min_nrpages = 1U < min_order;

So it's obvious how the index alignment is related to the folio
order?

> +	pgoff_t index = round_down(vmf->pgoff, min_nrpages);
> +	DEFINE_READAHEAD(ractl, file, ra, mapping, index);
>  	struct file *fpin = NULL;
>  	unsigned long vm_flags = vmf->vma->vm_flags;
>  	unsigned int mmap_miss;
> @@ -3147,10 +3151,11 @@ static struct file *do_sync_mmap_readahead(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>  	 */
>  	fpin = maybe_unlock_mmap_for_io(vmf, fpin);
>  	ra->start = max_t(long, 0, vmf->pgoff - ra->ra_pages / 2);
> +	ra->start = round_down(ra->start, min_nrpages);

Again, another random rounding operation....

>  	ra->size = ra->ra_pages;
>  	ra->async_size = ra->ra_pages / 4;
>  	ractl._index = ra->start;
> -	page_cache_ra_order(&ractl, ra, 0);
> +	page_cache_ra_order(&ractl, ra, min_order);
>  	return fpin;
>  }
>  
> @@ -3164,7 +3169,9 @@ static struct file *do_async_mmap_readahead(struct vm_fault *vmf,
>  {
>  	struct file *file = vmf->vma->vm_file;
>  	struct file_ra_state *ra = &file->f_ra;
> -	DEFINE_READAHEAD(ractl, file, ra, file->f_mapping, vmf->pgoff);
> +	unsigned int min_nrpages = mapping_min_folio_nrpages(file->f_mapping);
> +	pgoff_t index = round_down(vmf->pgoff, min_nrpages);
> +	DEFINE_READAHEAD(ractl, file, ra, file->f_mapping, index);

Ok, this is begging for a new DEFINE_READAHEAD_ALIGNED() macro which
internally grabs the mapping_min_folio_nrpages() from the mapping
passed to the macro.

>  	struct file *fpin = NULL;
>  	unsigned int mmap_miss;
>  
> @@ -3212,13 +3219,17 @@ vm_fault_t filemap_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>  	struct file *file = vmf->vma->vm_file;
>  	struct file *fpin = NULL;
>  	struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
> +	unsigned int min_order = mapping_min_folio_order(mapping);
> +	unsigned int nrpages = 1UL << min_order;

You didn't use mapping_min_folio_nrpages() for this.

At least initialise all the variables the same way in the same
patch!

>  	struct inode *inode = mapping->host;
> -	pgoff_t max_idx, index = vmf->pgoff;
> +	pgoff_t max_idx, index = round_down(vmf->pgoff, nrpages);

Yup, I can't help but think that with how many times this is being
repeated in this patchset that a helper or two is in order:

	index = mapping_align_start_index(mapping, vmf->pgoff);

And then most of the calls to mapping_min_folio_order() and
mapping_min_folio_nrpages() can be removed from this code, too.


>  	struct folio *folio;
>  	vm_fault_t ret = 0;
>  	bool mapping_locked = false;
>  
>  	max_idx = DIV_ROUND_UP(i_size_read(inode), PAGE_SIZE);
> +	max_idx = round_up(max_idx, nrpages);

	max_index = mapping_align_end_index(mapping,
			DIV_ROUND_UP(i_size_read(inode), PAGE_SIZE));

>  	if (unlikely(index >= max_idx))
>  		return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
>  
> @@ -3317,13 +3328,17 @@ vm_fault_t filemap_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>  	 * We must recheck i_size under page lock.
>  	 */
>  	max_idx = DIV_ROUND_UP(i_size_read(inode), PAGE_SIZE);
> +	max_idx = round_up(max_idx, nrpages);

Same again:

	max_index = mapping_align_end_index(mapping,
			DIV_ROUND_UP(i_size_read(inode), PAGE_SIZE));
> +
>  	if (unlikely(index >= max_idx)) {
>  		folio_unlock(folio);
>  		folio_put(folio);
>  		return VM_FAULT_SIGBUS;
>  	}
>  
> -	vmf->page = folio_file_page(folio, index);
> +	VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_order(folio) < min_order, folio);
> +
> +	vmf->page = folio_file_page(folio, vmf->pgoff);
>  	return ret | VM_FAULT_LOCKED;
>  
>  page_not_uptodate:
> @@ -3658,6 +3673,9 @@ static struct folio *do_read_cache_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
>  {
>  	struct folio *folio;
>  	int err;
> +	unsigned int min_nrpages = mapping_min_folio_nrpages(mapping);
> +
> +	index = round_down(index, min_nrpages);

And more magic rounding.

	index = mapping_align_start_index(mapping, index);

-Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-02-13 22:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-13  9:36 [RFC v2 00/14] enable bs > ps in XFS Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 01/14] fs: Allow fine-grained control of folio sizes Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 12:03   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-02-13 16:34   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13 21:05     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 21:29       ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-14 19:00         ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-02-15 10:34           ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-14 18:49   ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-02-15 10:21     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 02/14] filemap: align the index to mapping_min_order in the page cache Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 12:20   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-02-13 21:13     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 22:00   ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 03/14] filemap: use mapping_min_order while allocating folios Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 14:58   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-02-13 16:38   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13 22:05   ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-14 10:13     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 04/14] readahead: set file_ra_state->ra_pages to be at least mapping_min_order Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 14:59   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-02-13 16:46   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13 22:09   ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-14 13:32     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-14 13:53       ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 05/14] readahead: align index to mapping_min_order in ondemand_ra and force_ra Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 15:00   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-02-13 16:46   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13 22:29   ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-14 15:10     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 06/14] readahead: rework loop in page_cache_ra_unbounded() Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 16:47   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 07/14] readahead: allocate folios with mapping_min_order in ra_(unbounded|order) Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 15:01   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-02-13 16:47   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 08/14] mm: do not split a folio if it has minimum folio order requirement Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 15:02   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 09/14] mm: Support order-1 folios in the page cache Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 15:03   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 10/14] iomap: fix iomap_dio_zero() for fs bs > system page size Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 15:06   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-02-13 16:30   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13 21:27     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 21:30       ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-14 15:13         ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 11/14] xfs: expose block size in stat Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 16:27   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13 21:32     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 12/14] xfs: make the calculation generic in xfs_sb_validate_fsb_count() Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 16:26   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13 21:48     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 22:44       ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-14 15:51         ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 13/14] xfs: add an experimental CONFIG_XFS_LBS option Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 16:39   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-13 21:19   ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-13 21:54     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 22:45       ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-13  9:37 ` [RFC v2 14/14] xfs: enable block size larger than page size support Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 16:20   ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-02-14 16:40     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-13 21:34   ` Dave Chinner
2024-02-14 16:35     ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-02-15 22:17       ` Dave Chinner

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=ZcvmjthSu0TNkf8z@dread.disaster.area \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=gost.dev@samsung.com \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel@pankajraghav.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
    --cc=p.raghav@samsung.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /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).