linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <davidhildenbrandkernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	 Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	 Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
	 Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>,
	 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
	 Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
	 Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>,
	 "Christoph Lameter (Ampere)" <cl@gentwo.org>,
	 Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
	 Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
	 Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
	Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>,
	 Yin Fengwei <fengwei_yin@linux.alibaba.com>,
	 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,  linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 2/2] arm64, tlbflush: don't TLBI broadcast if page reused in write fault
Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2025 15:20:21 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87qzu97zyi.fsf@DESKTOP-5N7EMDA> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2b9fa85b-54ff-415c-9163-461e28b6d660@gmail.com> (David Hildenbrand's message of "Thu, 6 Nov 2025 10:47:10 +0100")

Hi, David,

"David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <davidhildenbrandkernel@gmail.com> writes:

> On 04.11.25 10:55, Huang Ying wrote:
>> A multi-thread customer workload with large memory footprint uses
>> fork()/exec() to run some external programs every tens seconds.  When
>> running the workload on an arm64 server machine, it's observed that
>> quite some CPU cycles are spent in the TLB flushing functions.  While
>> running the workload on the x86_64 server machine, it's not.  This
>> causes the performance on arm64 to be much worse than that on x86_64.
>> During the workload running, after fork()/exec() write-protects all
>> pages in the parent process, memory writing in the parent process
>> will cause a write protection fault.  Then the page fault handler
>> will make the PTE/PDE writable if the page can be reused, which is
>> almost always true in the workload.  On arm64, to avoid the write
>> protection fault on other CPUs, the page fault handler flushes the TLB
>> globally with TLBI broadcast after changing the PTE/PDE.  However, this
>> isn't always necessary.  Firstly, it's safe to leave some stale
>> read-only TLB entries as long as they will be flushed finally.
>> Secondly, it's quite possible that the original read-only PTE/PDEs
>> aren't cached in remote TLB at all if the memory footprint is large.
>> In fact, on x86_64, the page fault handler doesn't flush the remote
>> TLB in this situation, which benefits the performance a lot.
>> To improve the performance on arm64, make the write protection fault
>> handler flush the TLB locally instead of globally via TLBI broadcast
>> after making the PTE/PDE writable.  If there are stale read-only TLB
>> entries in the remote CPUs, the page fault handler on these CPUs will
>> regard the page fault as spurious and flush the stale TLB entries.
>> To test the patchset, make the usemem.c from
>> vm-scalability (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/vm-scalability.git).
>> support calling fork()/exec() periodically.  To mimic the behavior of
>> the customer workload, run usemem with 4 threads, access 100GB memory,
>> and call fork()/exec() every 40 seconds.  Test results show that with
>> the patchset the score of usemem improves ~40.6%.  The cycles% of TLB
>> flush functions reduces from ~50.5% to ~0.3% in perf profile.
>> 
>
> All makes sense to me.
>
> Some smaller comments below.

Thanks!

> [...]
>
>> +
>> +static inline void local_flush_tlb_page_nonotify(
>> +	struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long uaddr)
>
> NIT: "struct vm_area_struct *vma" fits onto the previous line.

Sure.

>> +{
>> +	__local_flush_tlb_page_nonotify_nosync(vma->vm_mm, uaddr);
>> +	dsb(nsh);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void local_flush_tlb_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>> +					unsigned long uaddr)
>> +{
>> +	__local_flush_tlb_page_nonotify_nosync(vma->vm_mm, uaddr);
>> +	mmu_notifier_arch_invalidate_secondary_tlbs(vma->vm_mm, uaddr & PAGE_MASK,
>> +						(uaddr & PAGE_MASK) + PAGE_SIZE);
>> +	dsb(nsh);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static inline void __flush_tlb_page_nosync(struct mm_struct *mm,
>>   					   unsigned long uaddr)
>>   {
>> @@ -472,6 +512,22 @@ static inline void __flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>   	dsb(ish);
>>   }
>>   +static inline void local_flush_tlb_contpte(struct vm_area_struct
>> *vma,
>> +					   unsigned long addr)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned long asid;
>> +
>> +	addr = round_down(addr, CONT_PTE_SIZE);
>> +
>> +	dsb(nshst);
>> +	asid = ASID(vma->vm_mm);
>> +	__flush_tlb_range_op(vale1, addr, CONT_PTES, PAGE_SIZE, asid,
>> +			     3, true, lpa2_is_enabled());
>> +	mmu_notifier_arch_invalidate_secondary_tlbs(vma->vm_mm, addr,
>> +						    addr + CONT_PTE_SIZE);
>> +	dsb(nsh);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static inline void flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>   				   unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
>>   {
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c b/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
>> index c0557945939c..589bcf878938 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
>> @@ -622,8 +622,7 @@ int contpte_ptep_set_access_flags(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>   			__ptep_set_access_flags(vma, addr, ptep, entry, 0);
>>     		if (dirty)
>> -			__flush_tlb_range(vma, start_addr, addr,
>> -							PAGE_SIZE, true, 3);
>> +			local_flush_tlb_contpte(vma, start_addr);
>
> In this case, we now flush a bigger range than we used to, no?
>
> Probably I am missing something (should this change be explained in
> more detail in the cover letter), but I'm wondering why this contpte
> handling wasn't required before on this level.

As Ryan explained in his replay email.  The flush range doesn't change
here.  We just replace global TLB flush with local TLB flush.

>>   	} else {
>>   		__contpte_try_unfold(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, orig_pte);
>>   		__ptep_set_access_flags(vma, addr, ptep, entry, dirty);
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>> index d816ff44faff..22f54f5afe3f 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
>> @@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ int __ptep_set_access_flags(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>     	/* Invalidate a stale read-only entry */
>
> I would expand this comment to also explain how remote TLBs are
> handled very briefly -> flush_tlb_fix_spurious_fault().

Sure.

>>   	if (dirty)
>> -		flush_tlb_page(vma, address);
>> +		local_flush_tlb_page(vma, address);
>>   	return 1;
>>   }
>>   

---
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-11-08  7:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-11-04  9:55 [PATCH -v4 0/2] arm, tlbflush: avoid " Huang Ying
2025-11-04  9:55 ` [PATCH -v4 1/2] mm: add spurious fault fixing support for huge pmd Huang Ying
2025-11-04  9:55 ` [PATCH -v4 2/2] arm64, tlbflush: don't TLBI broadcast if page reused in write fault Huang Ying
2025-11-06  9:47   ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-06 16:54     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-11-08  7:20     ` Huang, Ying [this message]
2025-11-06  1:01 ` [PATCH -v4 0/2] arm, tlbflush: avoid " 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=87qzu97zyi.fsf@DESKTOP-5N7EMDA \
    --to=ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=cl@gentwo.org \
    --cc=davidhildenbrandkernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=fengwei_yin@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=kevin.brodsky@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.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