From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CDC6C54E49 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 14:58:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id BFFD66B019D; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 09:58:46 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id B892A6B019F; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 09:58:46 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 93F4F6B01A0; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 09:58:46 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78D106B019D for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 09:58:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A299A18E2 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 14:58:46 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81870549852.17.9979731 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by imf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDD2880017 for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 14:58:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=bsMrYSfz; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com designates 170.10.129.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1709823523; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=fftuhXiA4rsEkGB1zq8wXeIHs3V2fXdxTIfwFilKrwE=; b=Yi6P5GK6KJiKtC4d+MHJNVPPaT4VUYsK73vxywnvg3x0E2t0lplYno/7hBqSNeoEemneEq VaAiwSfD1aXlqbjSIThKDt1Iy0zkZqrjNgNYB8aiA2nEqfbd8asKr8NPqm2AbsFdhxtSRr EulHZuU5zgzzAN655Ow2UUyUSD8+XkI= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1709823523; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=oKQZcsoz9BpXb65Eh7uNkDHR4VrArj6+JYG8SNKfdXF+szt7XMEVd3+CdBdt5FxIs7Iy07 SsM03torjR+q3sdHnbgUnrWk1kYgzNTqblfS0vrEHFp7jZlFM90+9RlJZuQ4Y3qU+rAt1P /sDrwdXi6rTy58zA/VlSzRpXoNmlVvk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=bsMrYSfz; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com designates 170.10.129.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1709823523; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=fftuhXiA4rsEkGB1zq8wXeIHs3V2fXdxTIfwFilKrwE=; b=bsMrYSfzCtdCPJUrrs4voEokcTRScN5ZyCs5foul5jVVP+RxE0DtTlCD636u6JIZJcXsTH yCtIDtkaRTDT1GcRWJjNShSassf15LlmfA7ylUwgWm9AsK6ImHAoGa+WtlQl7zNUeWGB1D vApgDD61IQJ58B3S9iKeu95d9jHttDg= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-283-3IDI1mp-O7GogST8nNmqKg-1; Thu, 07 Mar 2024 09:58:41 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 3IDI1mp-O7GogST8nNmqKg-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-33e70016b4dso154389f8f.3 for ; Thu, 07 Mar 2024 06:58:41 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1709823520; x=1710428320; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:organization:autocrypt:from :references:cc:to:content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=fftuhXiA4rsEkGB1zq8wXeIHs3V2fXdxTIfwFilKrwE=; b=Uajd7WSJstChJpslqA9krNpH0EwkRm935b1zvqwneD2j+p6RdEZX8yyPaF/XVHJ1kB CRu/L93wB4nykYjT2So0i1iTf6hrHU3cpBc7mTUVfEB+miJvGK5KJ/ZSmZQfb3SJsFT8 HX+HFLG4N3UJMlcirJ0JNXXxlBgeFxSFZGSxoZ1gJnxmESgzC83kgx12rTcakPXs2BpV 2VOz7wauAlhz3be0NQHx7xTxwFdo6c2ZpO/tBNUkPPZgCZ+6bpdZqDH2PUKTMGkj6uAl D6FHvNGjg1qgtY/ztOfh3hd9iSGrm55EeLDi7VPYwTBmRZLSuhD/zWFHeuKZJRiV3TnS w39Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVUGSampDDFXIHLYHVvHMzVOHUBYeYwLD0igdFbycFCy5jydKPRnfLQgQYwQKi4VvzBGFak9BEfiSkrU5EFTsMOJRY= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyS6cK6gKMSRp0VSTMWg+Ez96v9MF6L6jyCZr8oC0SOKLj9UX1c Lvja5hmiCEa1A8xdodPaZgVfO3qVvmnE3r9YYfyQouRHz5VlzS9qaeWX/vCDvEzT9u+iUXveAgy JfKe/RAca1WS5r9RXLno2OSHYaNfLGoYPyF1FA1G3K8aFDdqY X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:35d1:b0:412:e56e:b4f5 with SMTP id r17-20020a05600c35d100b00412e56eb4f5mr8234736wmq.8.1709823520528; Thu, 07 Mar 2024 06:58:40 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEYffwqZK9owJYaFIVPQBLMZY1HpjcTS8bSLKCxzKRndCOQ8iyE3zEmVFYDCfz5pX9zc22RUA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:35d1:b0:412:e56e:b4f5 with SMTP id r17-20020a05600c35d100b00412e56eb4f5mr8234717wmq.8.1709823520042; Thu, 07 Mar 2024 06:58:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2003:cb:c74d:6400:4867:4ed0:9726:a0c9? (p200300cbc74d640048674ed09726a0c9.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:cb:c74d:6400:4867:4ed0:9726:a0c9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id iv20-20020a05600c549400b0041313d4c852sm648897wmb.19.2024.03.07.06.58.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 07 Mar 2024 06:58:39 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <63801377-2648-4c3b-b534-3cc5835f5cf6@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 15:58:38 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm/madvise: enhance lazyfreeing with mTHP in madvise_free To: Lance Yang Cc: Ryan Roberts , Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>, Vishal Moola , akpm@linux-foundation.org, zokeefe@google.com, shy828301@gmail.com, mhocko@suse.com, fengwei.yin@intel.com, xiehuan09@gmail.com, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com, songmuchun@bytedance.com, peterx@redhat.com, minchan@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20240307061425.21013-1-ioworker0@gmail.com> <03458c20-5544-411b-9b8d-b4600a9b802f@arm.com> <501c9f77-1459-467a-8619-78e86b46d300@arm.com> <8f84c7d6-982a-4933-a7a7-3f640df64991@redhat.com> From: David Hildenbrand Autocrypt: addr=david@redhat.com; keydata= xsFNBFXLn5EBEAC+zYvAFJxCBY9Tr1xZgcESmxVNI/0ffzE/ZQOiHJl6mGkmA1R7/uUpiCjJ dBrn+lhhOYjjNefFQou6478faXE6o2AhmebqT4KiQoUQFV4R7y1KMEKoSyy8hQaK1umALTdL QZLQMzNE74ap+GDK0wnacPQFpcG1AE9RMq3aeErY5tujekBS32jfC/7AnH7I0v1v1TbbK3Gp XNeiN4QroO+5qaSr0ID2sz5jtBLRb15RMre27E1ImpaIv2Jw8NJgW0k/D1RyKCwaTsgRdwuK Kx/Y91XuSBdz0uOyU/S8kM1+ag0wvsGlpBVxRR/xw/E8M7TEwuCZQArqqTCmkG6HGcXFT0V9 PXFNNgV5jXMQRwU0O/ztJIQqsE5LsUomE//bLwzj9IVsaQpKDqW6TAPjcdBDPLHvriq7kGjt WhVhdl0qEYB8lkBEU7V2Yb+SYhmhpDrti9Fq1EsmhiHSkxJcGREoMK/63r9WLZYI3+4W2rAc UucZa4OT27U5ZISjNg3Ev0rxU5UH2/pT4wJCfxwocmqaRr6UYmrtZmND89X0KigoFD/XSeVv jwBRNjPAubK9/k5NoRrYqztM9W6sJqrH8+UWZ1Idd/DdmogJh0gNC0+N42Za9yBRURfIdKSb B3JfpUqcWwE7vUaYrHG1nw54pLUoPG6sAA7Mehl3nd4pZUALHwARAQABzSREYXZpZCBIaWxk ZW5icmFuZCA8ZGF2aWRAcmVkaGF0LmNvbT7CwZgEEwEIAEICGwMGCwkIBwMCBhUIAgkKCwQW AgMBAh4BAheAAhkBFiEEG9nKrXNcTDpGDfzKTd4Q9wD/g1oFAl8Ox4kFCRKpKXgACgkQTd4Q 9wD/g1oHcA//a6Tj7SBNjFNM1iNhWUo1lxAja0lpSodSnB2g4FCZ4R61SBR4l/psBL73xktp rDHrx4aSpwkRP6Epu6mLvhlfjmkRG4OynJ5HG1gfv7RJJfnUdUM1z5kdS8JBrOhMJS2c/gPf wv1TGRq2XdMPnfY2o0CxRqpcLkx4vBODvJGl2mQyJF/gPepdDfcT8/PY9BJ7FL6Hrq1gnAo4 3Iv9qV0JiT2wmZciNyYQhmA1V6dyTRiQ4YAc31zOo2IM+xisPzeSHgw3ONY/XhYvfZ9r7W1l pNQdc2G+o4Di9NPFHQQhDw3YTRR1opJaTlRDzxYxzU6ZnUUBghxt9cwUWTpfCktkMZiPSDGd KgQBjnweV2jw9UOTxjb4LXqDjmSNkjDdQUOU69jGMUXgihvo4zhYcMX8F5gWdRtMR7DzW/YE BgVcyxNkMIXoY1aYj6npHYiNQesQlqjU6azjbH70/SXKM5tNRplgW8TNprMDuntdvV9wNkFs 9TyM02V5aWxFfI42+aivc4KEw69SE9KXwC7FSf5wXzuTot97N9Phj/Z3+jx443jo2NR34XgF 89cct7wJMjOF7bBefo0fPPZQuIma0Zym71cP61OP/i11ahNye6HGKfxGCOcs5wW9kRQEk8P9 M/k2wt3mt/fCQnuP/mWutNPt95w9wSsUyATLmtNrwccz63XOwU0EVcufkQEQAOfX3n0g0fZz Bgm/S2zF/kxQKCEKP8ID+Vz8sy2GpDvveBq4H2Y34XWsT1zLJdvqPI4af4ZSMxuerWjXbVWb T6d4odQIG0fKx4F8NccDqbgHeZRNajXeeJ3R7gAzvWvQNLz4piHrO/B4tf8svmRBL0ZB5P5A 2uhdwLU3NZuK22zpNn4is87BPWF8HhY0L5fafgDMOqnf4guJVJPYNPhUFzXUbPqOKOkL8ojk CXxkOFHAbjstSK5Ca3fKquY3rdX3DNo+EL7FvAiw1mUtS+5GeYE+RMnDCsVFm/C7kY8c2d0G NWkB9pJM5+mnIoFNxy7YBcldYATVeOHoY4LyaUWNnAvFYWp08dHWfZo9WCiJMuTfgtH9tc75 7QanMVdPt6fDK8UUXIBLQ2TWr/sQKE9xtFuEmoQGlE1l6bGaDnnMLcYu+Asp3kDT0w4zYGsx 5r6XQVRH4+5N6eHZiaeYtFOujp5n+pjBaQK7wUUjDilPQ5QMzIuCL4YjVoylWiBNknvQWBXS lQCWmavOT9sttGQXdPCC5ynI+1ymZC1ORZKANLnRAb0NH/UCzcsstw2TAkFnMEbo9Zu9w7Kv AxBQXWeXhJI9XQssfrf4Gusdqx8nPEpfOqCtbbwJMATbHyqLt7/oz/5deGuwxgb65pWIzufa N7eop7uh+6bezi+rugUI+w6DABEBAAHCwXwEGAEIACYCGwwWIQQb2cqtc1xMOkYN/MpN3hD3 AP+DWgUCXw7HsgUJEqkpoQAKCRBN3hD3AP+DWrrpD/4qS3dyVRxDcDHIlmguXjC1Q5tZTwNB boaBTPHSy/Nksu0eY7x6HfQJ3xajVH32Ms6t1trDQmPx2iP5+7iDsb7OKAb5eOS8h+BEBDeq 3ecsQDv0fFJOA9ag5O3LLNk+3x3q7e0uo06XMaY7UHS341ozXUUI7wC7iKfoUTv03iO9El5f XpNMx/YrIMduZ2+nd9Di7o5+KIwlb2mAB9sTNHdMrXesX8eBL6T9b+MZJk+mZuPxKNVfEQMQ a5SxUEADIPQTPNvBewdeI80yeOCrN+Zzwy/Mrx9EPeu59Y5vSJOx/z6OUImD/GhX7Xvkt3kq Er5KTrJz3++B6SH9pum9PuoE/k+nntJkNMmQpR4MCBaV/J9gIOPGodDKnjdng+mXliF3Ptu6 3oxc2RCyGzTlxyMwuc2U5Q7KtUNTdDe8T0uE+9b8BLMVQDDfJjqY0VVqSUwImzTDLX9S4g/8 kC4HRcclk8hpyhY2jKGluZO0awwTIMgVEzmTyBphDg/Gx7dZU1Xf8HFuE+UZ5UDHDTnwgv7E th6RC9+WrhDNspZ9fJjKWRbveQgUFCpe1sa77LAw+XFrKmBHXp9ZVIe90RMe2tRL06BGiRZr jPrnvUsUUsjRoRNJjKKA/REq+sAnhkNPPZ/NNMjaZ5b8Tovi8C0tmxiCHaQYqj7G2rgnT0kt WNyWQQ== Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Stat-Signature: me51juffuo5osb7wfg6s4fcpf8gppbx6 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam10 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: BDD2880017 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1709823523-582873 X-HE-Meta: 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 u2zUwAiq 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 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 07.03.24 15:41, Lance Yang wrote: > Hey Barry, Ryan, David, > > Thanks a lot for taking the time to explain and provide suggestions! > I really appreciate your time! > > IIUC, here's what we need to do for v3: > > If folio_likely_mapped_shared() is true, or if we cannot acquire > the folio lock, we simply skip the batched PTEs. Then, we compare > the number of batched PTEs against folio_mapcount(). Finally, > batch-update the access and dirty only. > > I'm not sure if I've understood correctly, could you please confirm? > > Thanks, > Lance > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 7:17 PM David Hildenbrand wrote: >> >> On 07.03.24 12:13, Ryan Roberts wrote: >>> On 07/03/2024 10:54, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>> On 07.03.24 11:54, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>> On 07.03.24 11:50, Ryan Roberts wrote: >>>>>> On 07/03/2024 09:33, Barry Song wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 10:07 PM Ryan Roberts wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 07/03/2024 08:10, Barry Song wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 9:00 PM Lance Yang wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hey Barry, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for taking time to review! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 3:00 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 7:15 PM Lance Yang wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>>>>>>> +static inline bool can_mark_large_folio_lazyfree(unsigned long addr, >>>>>>>>>>>> + struct folio *folio, >>>>>>>>>>>> pte_t *start_pte) >>>>>>>>>>>> +{ >>>>>>>>>>>> + int nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio); >>>>>>>>>>>> + fpb_t flags = FPB_IGNORE_DIRTY | FPB_IGNORE_SOFT_DIRTY; >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> + for (int i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) >>>>>>>>>>>> + if (page_mapcount(folio_page(folio, i)) != 1) >>>>>>>>>>>> + return false; >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> we have moved to folio_estimated_sharers though it is not precise, so >>>>>>>>>>> we don't do >>>>>>>>>>> this check with lots of loops and depending on the subpage's mapcount. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If we don't check the subpage’s mapcount, and there is a cow folio >>>>>>>>>> associated >>>>>>>>>> with this folio and the cow folio has smaller size than this folio, >>>>>>>>>> should we still >>>>>>>>>> mark this folio as lazyfree? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree, this is true. However, we've somehow accepted the fact that >>>>>>>>> folio_likely_mapped_shared >>>>>>>>> can result in false negatives or false positives to balance the >>>>>>>>> overhead. So I really don't know :-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Maybe David and Vishal can give some comments here. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> BTW, do we need to rebase our work against David's changes[1]? >>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240227201548.857831-1-david@redhat.com/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes, we should rebase our work against David’s changes. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> + return nr_pages == folio_pte_batch(folio, addr, start_pte, >>>>>>>>>>>> + ptep_get(start_pte), nr_pages, >>>>>>>>>>>> flags, NULL); >>>>>>>>>>>> +} >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> static int madvise_free_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr, >>>>>>>>>>>> unsigned long end, struct mm_walk *walk) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -676,11 +690,45 @@ static int madvise_free_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, >>>>>>>>>>>> unsigned long addr, >>>>>>>>>>>> */ >>>>>>>>>>>> if (folio_test_large(folio)) { >>>>>>>>>>>> int err; >>>>>>>>>>>> + unsigned long next_addr, align; >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - if (folio_estimated_sharers(folio) != 1) >>>>>>>>>>>> - break; >>>>>>>>>>>> - if (!folio_trylock(folio)) >>>>>>>>>>>> - break; >>>>>>>>>>>> + if (folio_estimated_sharers(folio) != 1 || >>>>>>>>>>>> + !folio_trylock(folio)) >>>>>>>>>>>> + goto skip_large_folio; >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I don't think we can skip all the PTEs for nr_pages, as some of them >>>>>>>>>>> might be >>>>>>>>>>> pointing to other folios. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> for example, for a large folio with 16PTEs, you do MADV_DONTNEED(15-16), >>>>>>>>>>> and write the memory of PTE15 and PTE16, you get page faults, thus PTE15 >>>>>>>>>>> and PTE16 will point to two different small folios. We can only skip >>>>>>>>>>> when we >>>>>>>>>>> are sure nr_pages == folio_pte_batch() is sure. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Agreed. Thanks for pointing that out. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> + align = folio_nr_pages(folio) * PAGE_SIZE; >>>>>>>>>>>> + next_addr = ALIGN_DOWN(addr + align, align); >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>>>>>>> + * If we mark only the subpages as lazyfree, or >>>>>>>>>>>> + * cannot mark the entire large folio as lazyfree, >>>>>>>>>>>> + * then just split it. >>>>>>>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>>>>>>> + if (next_addr > end || next_addr - addr != >>>>>>>>>>>> align || >>>>>>>>>>>> + !can_mark_large_folio_lazyfree(addr, folio, >>>>>>>>>>>> pte)) >>>>>>>>>>>> + goto split_large_folio; >>>>>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>>>>> + /* >>>>>>>>>>>> + * Avoid unnecessary folio splitting if the large >>>>>>>>>>>> + * folio is entirely within the given range. >>>>>>>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>>>>>>> + folio_clear_dirty(folio); >>>>>>>>>>>> + folio_unlock(folio); >>>>>>>>>>>> + for (; addr != next_addr; pte++, addr += >>>>>>>>>>>> PAGE_SIZE) { >>>>>>>>>>>> + ptent = ptep_get(pte); >>>>>>>>>>>> + if (pte_young(ptent) || >>>>>>>>>>>> pte_dirty(ptent)) { >>>>>>>>>>>> + ptent = ptep_get_and_clear_full( >>>>>>>>>>>> + mm, addr, pte, >>>>>>>>>>>> tlb->fullmm); >>>>>>>>>>>> + ptent = pte_mkold(ptent); >>>>>>>>>>>> + ptent = pte_mkclean(ptent); >>>>>>>>>>>> + set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, ptent); >>>>>>>>>>>> + tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, pte, >>>>>>>>>>>> addr); >>>>>>>>>>>> + } >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Can we do this in batches? for a CONT-PTE mapped large folio, you are >>>>>>>>>>> unfolding >>>>>>>>>>> and folding again. It seems quite expensive. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm not convinced we should be doing this in batches. We want the initial >>>>>>>> folio_pte_batch() to be as loose as possible regarding permissions so that we >>>>>>>> reduce our chances of splitting folios to the min. (e.g. ignore SW bits like >>>>>>>> soft dirty, etc). I think it might be possible that some PTEs are RO and other >>>>>>>> RW too (e.g. due to cow - although with the current cow impl, probably not. >>>>>>>> But >>>>>>>> its fragile to assume that). Anyway, if we do an initial batch that ignores >>>>>>>> all >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You are correct. I believe this scenario could indeed occur. For instance, >>>>>>> if process A forks process B and then unmaps itself, leaving B as the >>>>>>> sole process owning the large folio. The current wp_page_reuse() function >>>>>>> will reuse PTE one by one while the specific subpage is written. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hmm - I thought it would only reuse if the total mapcount for the folio was 1. >>>>>> And since it is a large folio with each page mapped once in proc B, I thought >>>>>> every subpage write would cause a copy except the last one? I haven't looked at >>>>>> the code for a while. But I had it in my head that this is an area we need to >>>>>> improve for mTHP. >>>>> >>>>> wp_page_reuse() will currently reuse a PTE part of a large folio only if >>>>> a single PTE remains mapped (refcount == 0). >>>> >>>> ^ == 1 >>> >>> Ahh yes. That's what I meant. I got the behacviour vagulely right though. >>> >>> Anyway, regardless, I'm not sure we want to batch here. Or if we do, we want to >>> batch function that will only clear access and dirty. >> >> We likely want to detect a folio batch the "usual" way (as relaxed as >> possible), then do all the checks (#pte == folio_mapcount() under folio >> lock), and finally batch-update the access and dirty only. Something like: 1) We might want to factor out the existing single-pte case and extend it to handle multiple PTEs (nr_pages). For the existing code, we would pass in "nr_pages". For example, instead of "folio_mapcount(folio) != 1" you'd check "folio_mapcount(folio) != nr_pages" in there. And we'd need functions to abstract working on multiple ptes. 2) We'd add something like wrprotect_ptes(), that does the mkold+clean on multiple PTEs. Naming suggestion for such a function requested :) 3) Then, we might want to extend folio_pte_batch() by an *any_young and *any_dirty parameter that will get optimized out for other users. So you get that information right when scanning. Just a rough idea, devil is in the detail. But likely trying to abstrct the code to handle "multiple pages of the same folio" should come just naturally like we used to do for fork() and munmap() so far. -- Cheers, David / dhildenb