From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel test robot <yujie.liu@intel.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,unmap: avoid flushing TLB in batch if PTE is inaccessible
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2023 19:47:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <402A3E9D-5136-4747-91FF-C3AA2D557784@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230410075224.827740-1-ying.huang@intel.com>
> On Apr 10, 2023, at 12:52 AM, Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> wrote:
>
> 0Day/LKP reported a performance regression for commit
> 7e12beb8ca2a ("migrate_pages: batch flushing TLB"). In the commit, the
> TLB flushing during page migration is batched. So, in
> try_to_migrate_one(), ptep_clear_flush() is replaced with
> set_tlb_ubc_flush_pending(). In further investigation, it is found
> that the TLB flushing can be avoided in ptep_clear_flush() if the PTE
> is inaccessible. In fact, we can optimize in similar way for the
> batched TLB flushing too to improve the performance.
>
> So in this patch, we check pte_accessible() before
> set_tlb_ubc_flush_pending() in try_to_unmap/migrate_one(). Tests show
> that the benchmark score of the anon-cow-rand-mt test case of
> vm-scalability test suite can improve up to 2.1% with the patch on a
> Intel server machine. The TLB flushing IPI can reduce up to 44.3%.
LGTM.
I know it’s meaningless for x86 (but perhaps ARM would use this infra
too): do we need smp_mb__after_atomic() after ptep_get_and_clear() and
before pte_accessible()?
In addition, if this goes into stable (based on the Fixes tag), consider
breaking it into 2 patches, when only one would be backported.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-10 19:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-10 7:52 Huang Ying
2023-04-10 19:47 ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2023-04-11 1:31 ` Huang, Ying
2023-04-11 17:52 ` Nadav Amit
2023-04-12 1:50 ` Huang, Ying
2023-04-12 17:00 ` Nadav Amit
2023-04-18 3:17 ` Huang, Ying
2023-04-19 22:58 ` Nadav Amit
2023-04-20 7:44 ` haoxin
2023-04-20 8:38 ` Huang, Ying
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=402A3E9D-5136-4747-91FF-C3AA2D557784@vmware.com \
--to=namit@vmware.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=yujie.liu@intel.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