All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ashish Mhetre <amhetre@nvidia.com>
To: vdumpa@nvidia.com, avanbrunt@nvidia.com
Cc: Snikam@nvidia.com, praithatha@nvidia.com,
	Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>, Shaohua Li <shli@fusionio.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] x86/mm: In the PTE swapout page reclaim case clear the accessed bit instead of flushing the TLB
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2018 10:02:50 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1539059570-9043-1-git-send-email-amhetre@nvidia.com> (raw)

From: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>

We use the accessed bit to age a page at page reclaim time,
and currently we also flush the TLB when doing so.

But in some workloads TLB flush overhead is very heavy. In my
simple multithreaded app with a lot of swap to several pcie
SSDs, removing the tlb flush gives about 20% ~ 30% swapout
speedup.

Fortunately just removing the TLB flush is a valid optimization:
on x86 CPUs, clearing the accessed bit without a TLB flush
doesn't cause data corruption.

It could cause incorrect page aging and the (mistaken) reclaim of
hot pages, but the chance of that should be relatively low.

So as a performance optimization don't flush the TLB when
clearing the accessed bit, it will eventually be flushed by
a context switch or a VM operation anyway. [ In the rare
event of it not getting flushed for a long time the delay
shouldn't really matter because there's no real memory
pressure for swapout to react to. ]

Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@fusionio.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Acked-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140408075809.GA1764@kernel.org
[ Rewrote the changelog and the code comments. ]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
---
 arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c | 21 ++++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c b/arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c
index c96314a..0004ac7 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c
@@ -399,13 +399,20 @@ int pmdp_test_and_clear_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 int ptep_clear_flush_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 			   unsigned long address, pte_t *ptep)
 {
-	int young;
-
-	young = ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, address, ptep);
-	if (young)
-		flush_tlb_page(vma, address);
-
-	return young;
+	/*
+	 * On x86 CPUs, clearing the accessed bit without a TLB flush
+	 * doesn't cause data corruption. [ It could cause incorrect
+	 * page aging and the (mistaken) reclaim of hot pages, but the
+	 * chance of that should be relatively low. ]
+	 *
+	 * So as a performance optimization don't flush the TLB when
+	 * clearing the accessed bit, it will eventually be flushed by
+	 * a context switch or a VM operation anyway. [ In the rare
+	 * event of it not getting flushed for a long time the delay
+	 * shouldn't really matter because there's no real memory
+	 * pressure for swapout to react to. ]
+	 */
+	return ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, address, ptep);
 }
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
-- 
2.1.4

             reply	other threads:[~2018-10-09  4:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-09  4:32 Ashish Mhetre [this message]
2018-10-09  7:16 ` [PATCH] x86/mm: In the PTE swapout page reclaim case clear the accessed bit instead of flushing the TLB Peter Zijlstra
2018-10-09  7:20   ` Nadav Amit
2018-10-09  7:47     ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-10-09  7:25   ` Ashish Mhetre

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=1539059570-9043-1-git-send-email-amhetre@nvidia.com \
    --to=amhetre@nvidia.com \
    --cc=Snikam@nvidia.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=avanbrunt@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=praithatha@nvidia.com \
    --cc=shli@fusionio.com \
    --cc=shli@kernel.org \
    --cc=vdumpa@nvidia.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.