From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: ryan.roberts@arm.com, willy@infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hughd@google.com,
vishal.moola@gmail.com, yang@os.amperecomputing.com,
ziy@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mempolicy: Optimize queue_folios_pte_range by PTE batching
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 10:22:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <019d1c4a-ffd0-4602-b2ba-cf07379dab17@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7f96283b-11b3-49ee-9d2d-5ad977325cb0@linux.alibaba.com>
On 16.04.25 08:32, Baolin Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 2025/4/16 13:30, Dev Jain wrote:
>> After the check for queue_folio_required(), the code only cares about the
>> folio in the for loop, i.e the PTEs are redundant. Therefore, optimize
>> this loop by skipping over a PTE batch mapping the same folio.
>>
>> With a test program migrating pages of the calling process, which includes
>> a mapped VMA of size 4GB with pte-mapped large folios of order-9, and
>> migrating once back and forth node-0 and node-1, the average execution
>> time reduces from 7.5 to 4 seconds, giving an approx 47% speedup.
>>
>> v2->v3:
>> - Don't use assignment in if condition
>>
>> v1->v2:
>> - Follow reverse xmas tree declarations
>> - Don't initialize nr
>> - Move folio_pte_batch() immediately after retrieving a normal folio
>> - increment nr_failed in one shot
>>
>> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
>> ---
>> mm/mempolicy.c | 12 ++++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
>> index b28a1e6ae096..4d2dc8b63965 100644
>> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
>> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
>> @@ -566,6 +566,7 @@ static void queue_folios_pmd(pmd_t *pmd, struct mm_walk *walk)
>> static int queue_folios_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
>> unsigned long end, struct mm_walk *walk)
>> {
>> + const fpb_t fpb_flags = FPB_IGNORE_DIRTY | FPB_IGNORE_SOFT_DIRTY;
>> struct vm_area_struct *vma = walk->vma;
>> struct folio *folio;
>> struct queue_pages *qp = walk->private;
>> @@ -573,6 +574,7 @@ static int queue_folios_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
>> pte_t *pte, *mapped_pte;
>> pte_t ptent;
>> spinlock_t *ptl;
>> + int max_nr, nr;
>>
>> ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(pmd, vma);
>> if (ptl) {
>> @@ -586,7 +588,9 @@ static int queue_folios_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
>> walk->action = ACTION_AGAIN;
>> return 0;
>> }
>> - for (; addr != end; pte++, addr += PAGE_SIZE) {
>> + for (; addr != end; pte += nr, addr += nr * PAGE_SIZE) {
>> + max_nr = (end - addr) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>> + nr = 1;
>> ptent = ptep_get(pte);
>> if (pte_none(ptent))
>> continue;
>> @@ -598,6 +602,10 @@ static int queue_folios_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
>> folio = vm_normal_folio(vma, addr, ptent);
>> if (!folio || folio_is_zone_device(folio))
>> continue;
>> + if (folio_test_large(folio) && max_nr != 1)
>> + nr = folio_pte_batch(folio, addr, pte, ptent,
>> + max_nr, fpb_flags,
>> + NULL, NULL, NULL);
>> /*
>> * vm_normal_folio() filters out zero pages, but there might
>> * still be reserved folios to skip, perhaps in a VDSO.
>> @@ -630,7 +638,7 @@ static int queue_folios_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
>> if (!(flags & (MPOL_MF_MOVE | MPOL_MF_MOVE_ALL)) ||
>> !vma_migratable(vma) ||
>> !migrate_folio_add(folio, qp->pagelist, flags)) {
>> - qp->nr_failed++;
>> + qp->nr_failed += nr;
>
> Sorry for chiming in late, but I am not convinced that 'qp->nr_failed'
> should add 'nr' when isolation fails.
This patch does not change the existing behavior. But I stumbled over
that as well ... and scratched my head.
>
> From the comments of queue_pages_range():
> "
> * >0 - this number of misplaced folios could not be queued for moving
> * (a hugetlbfs page or a transparent huge page being counted as 1).
> "
>
> That means if a large folio is failed to isolate, we should only add '1'
> for qp->nr_failed instead of the number of pages in this large folio. Right?
I think what the doc really meant is "PMD-mapped THP". PTE-mapped THPs
always had the same behavior: per PTE of the THP we would increment
nr_failed by 1.
I assume returning "1" for PMD-mapped THPs was wrong from the beginning;
it might only have been right for hugetlb pages.
With COW and similar things (VMA splits), achieving "count each folio
only once" reliably is a very hard thing to achieve.
Let's explore how "nr_failed" will get used.
1) do_mbind()
Only cares if "any failed", not the exact number.
2) migrate_pages()
Will return the number to user space, where documentation says:
"On success migrate_pages() returns the number of pages that could not
be moved (i.e., a return of zero means that all pages were successfully
moved)."
man-page does not document THP specifics AFAIKs. I would assume most
users care about "all migrated vs. any not migrated".
I would even feel confident to change the THP PMD-handling to return the
actual *pages*.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-16 8:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-16 5:30 Dev Jain
2025-04-16 6:32 ` Baolin Wang
2025-04-16 8:22 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2025-04-16 8:41 ` Baolin Wang
2025-04-16 8:51 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-16 8:56 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-21 6:30 ` Baolin Wang
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=019d1c4a-ffd0-4602-b2ba-cf07379dab17@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=vishal.moola@gmail.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=ziy@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox