From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: hannes@cmpxchg.org, riel@surriel.com, shakeel.butt@linux.dev,
roman.gushchin@linux.dev, yuzhao@google.com, baohua@kernel.org,
ryan.roberts@arm.com, rppt@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org,
cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com, corbet@lwn.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] mm: split underutilized THPs
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:21:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3f6e1e0a-6132-4222-abb6-133224e11009@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c0ed5796-a6a6-4757-b7df-666ba598d9fe@gmail.com>
On 09.08.24 12:31, Usama Arif wrote:
>
>
> On 08/08/2024 16:55, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 07.08.24 15:46, Usama Arif wrote:
>>> This is an attempt to mitigate the issue of running out of memory when THP
>>> is always enabled. During runtime whenever a THP is being faulted in
>>> (__do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page) or collapsed by khugepaged
>>> (collapse_huge_page), the THP is added to _deferred_list. Whenever memory
>>> reclaim happens in linux, the kernel runs the deferred_split
>>> shrinker which goes through the _deferred_list.
>>>
>>> If the folio was partially mapped, the shrinker attempts to split it.
>>> A new boolean is added to be able to distinguish between partially
>>> mapped folios and others in the deferred_list at split time in
>>> deferred_split_scan. Its needed as __folio_remove_rmap decrements
>>> the folio mapcount elements, hence it won't be possible to distinguish
>>> between partially mapped folios and others in deferred_split_scan
>>> without the boolean.
>>
>> Just so I get this right: Are you saying that we might now add fully mapped folios to the deferred split queue and that's what you want to distinguish?
>
> Yes
>
>>
>> If that's the case, then could we use a bit in folio->_flags_1 instead?
> Yes, thats a good idea. Will create the below flag for the next revision
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/page-flags.h b/include/linux/page-flags.h
> index 5769fe6e4950..5825bd1cf6db 100644
> --- a/include/linux/page-flags.h
> +++ b/include/linux/page-flags.h
> @@ -189,6 +189,11 @@ enum pageflags {
>
> #define PAGEFLAGS_MASK ((1UL << NR_PAGEFLAGS) - 1)
>
> +enum folioflags_1 {
> + /* The first 8 bits of folio->_flags_1 are used to keep track of folio order */
> + FOLIO_PARTIALLY_MAPPED = 8, /* folio is partially mapped */
> +}
This might be what you want to achieve:
diff --git a/include/linux/page-flags.h b/include/linux/page-flags.h
index a0a29bd092f8..d4722ed60ef8 100644
--- a/include/linux/page-flags.h
+++ b/include/linux/page-flags.h
@@ -182,6 +182,7 @@ enum pageflags {
/* At least one page in this folio has the hwpoison flag set */
PG_has_hwpoisoned = PG_active,
PG_large_rmappable = PG_workingset, /* anon or file-backed */
+ PG_partially_mapped, /* was identified to be partially mapped */
};
#define PAGEFLAGS_MASK ((1UL << NR_PAGEFLAGS) - 1)
@@ -861,8 +862,9 @@ static inline void ClearPageCompound(struct page *page)
ClearPageHead(page);
}
FOLIO_FLAG(large_rmappable, FOLIO_SECOND_PAGE)
+FOLIO_FLAG(partially_mapped, FOLIO_SECOND_PAGE)
#else
-FOLIO_FLAG_FALSE(large_rmappable)
+FOLIO_FLAG_FALSE(partially_mapped)
#endif
#define PG_head_mask ((1UL << PG_head))
The downside is an atomic op to set/clear, but it should likely not really matter
(initially, the flag will be clear, and we should only ever set it once when
partially unmapping). If it hurts, we can reconsider.
[...]
>> I would actually suggest to split decoupling of "_deferred_list" and "partially mapped" into a separate preparation patch.
>>
> Yes, will do. I will split it into 3 patches, 1st one that introduces FOLIO_PARTIALLY_MAPPED and sets/clear it in the right place without introducing any functional change, 2nd to split underutilized THPs and 3rd to add sysfs entry to enable/disable the shrinker. Should make the patches quite small and easy to review.
Great! As always, please shout if you disagree with something I propose :)
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-09 13:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20240807134732.3292797-1-usamaarif642@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20240807134732.3292797-3-usamaarif642@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20240807200241.GB1828817@cmpxchg.org>
2024-08-08 15:53 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] mm: remap unused subpages to shared zeropage when splitting isolated thp Usama Arif
[not found] ` <20240807134732.3292797-5-usamaarif642@gmail.com>
2024-08-08 15:55 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] mm: split underutilized THPs David Hildenbrand
2024-08-09 10:31 ` Usama Arif
2024-08-09 13:21 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2024-08-09 14:25 ` Usama Arif
[not found] ` <20240807134732.3292797-2-usamaarif642@gmail.com>
2024-08-08 15:56 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] mm: free zapped tail pages when splitting isolated thp David Hildenbrand
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=3f6e1e0a-6132-4222-abb6-133224e11009@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=usamaarif642@gmail.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yuzhao@google.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