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 46422C47073 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 22:14:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 943406B0085; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:14:55 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 8F3856B0087; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:14:55 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 793DF6B0088; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:14:55 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61DA16B0085 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 17:14:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin20.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D258A0B2D for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 22:14:55 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81664807350.20.4630942 Received: from mail-ua1-f41.google.com (mail-ua1-f41.google.com [209.85.222.41]) by imf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 536821A0003 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 22:14:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=A2J7mA5E; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of 21cnbao@gmail.com designates 209.85.222.41 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=21cnbao@gmail.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1704924892; 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=+ozr68i/vQIKzBW0M0AQQqE4yTdxp+nwisLDk2CdU4c=; b=E6BP5C4RH+3xEUiwtimQLcIdpExX/PYTGosM6CKrnLwttK0gJus/aCj2fNsitAyKaGiyPu GFfiCj2YkUJoURZlc5e7PzQA12EWh+GYwHL0eAgeLYq+cnKIggCxQi52fqjOOOQJxQV6jv PnDR4S4L9YrYQt+pzXfBkUZ2OBbEvvE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=A2J7mA5E; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of 21cnbao@gmail.com designates 209.85.222.41 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=21cnbao@gmail.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1704924892; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=oNBKz7oOxrgekxTTzn8jM4A4t22fRUohZgkzjFKb3UzV0scLfKWROA6e8CgKoCAkw5Alhj zZq7IQ+bMGV9H3ldqCubd6oyuUFsZ0atc7X1tY+3oDnOUwVLyVlBT8u3T1XfmmWMjyOJ0F 1yNyLs2xYndm9j5yrkMOIyOa2HgozYI= Received: by mail-ua1-f41.google.com with SMTP id a1e0cc1a2514c-7cc92a83200so1042416241.3 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:14:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1704924891; x=1705529691; darn=kvack.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=+ozr68i/vQIKzBW0M0AQQqE4yTdxp+nwisLDk2CdU4c=; b=A2J7mA5EeL0NsDyM+C696EVcFX/eYvb/VG0Ze1mHu/psgoAUtH/HPL0jFLTc+ZkObm zu6N0cy7NzQ8XBr5y5f+yYU4MBi7BGS3kkKmfutVgIfxWa8iM/g0B+7ALLQj+fbxc2g8 YUV0Oa8n/qIlo1CzAZCUoul/gBIN6DWIlsTJ2ZP6L0aaacs/PSZN9qh8F+puusaZjwKH Nn2nQ5VdwBh/qDpNJ3HMNtWzlQZPSr4Y6/QVhG5LhymgMzp/dnMNu3zyFh00Ooz40EVv c2M2Chlpj+WdoyYiZaHzdwKkZwENqlmzUyFbx0rHAky5A8W57KQIRyvcQc2wID/OH8po IJ9g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704924891; x=1705529691; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+ozr68i/vQIKzBW0M0AQQqE4yTdxp+nwisLDk2CdU4c=; b=SjqPIXELbeJLCncAZu8+0K9YkIAbTa48hCUM12tMlwl9Ggol9ul4LeinMIf3oa0z7s 3qQJpz6Yy0uFOHbCbkkrqGBxzzVrHeGuHuB4b76+JKvKgQu2zw/hsXQ041d92v8VmHEQ Ithzizp6xuEv3itTJoWUt594sCiOj35fs11SGwZxXOhVQOfk9eo4eF4pR0kITha9mIAp 4grOYJuBB7Xc1WCaXVlTv/LUuqqFCmu6Tx9vTRzCbLq1T5xGfKp6nGysd5zwSK5O3L4V UOxy4g0tv0NAdzbFhZuddmtpvXIzsh2bYX9m8n/bL5/oFL32gyaLkq0sXO3zeHEQiVzA oTjw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwthR9KoIzzwRoJUddlafLrTzIHLjegehia+HWhA9sf7cIxmbMS 4ju2CkqJPdq1YUNEEpcMDweWqvzJYxz0KSJil1U= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHP8bDPOr1vU/fuPGfmCxShkDvGxEww40RmVaildUl3YKcsK3X1kSPWPenkTtN8TdinNM+eiXbrt+Z955Q5lGQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6122:c82:b0:4b7:87c2:6c04 with SMTP id ba2-20020a0561220c8200b004b787c26c04mr126859vkb.18.1704924891204; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:14:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240102153828.1002295-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com> <4e7445a0-acc9-487f-999f-a2b6d03d265e@nvidia.com> <3bd5e4a3-9f67-4483-9a0e-9abb5eb783cd@arm.com> <94ebe62b-5f55-4be9-b464-4105b4692496@arm.com> <68d5ce7e-6587-47c6-bd0f-988adf5d92a4@arm.com> <974a2670-7fa9-425e-921e-8d54a596e6cf@arm.com> <6c77f143-9c2c-4d17-9a2a-d69d9adf2eea@arm.com> In-Reply-To: From: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 06:14:39 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1] tools/mm: Add thpmaps script to dump THP usage info To: Ryan Roberts Cc: David Hildenbrand , John Hubbard , Andrew Morton , Zenghui Yu , Matthew Wilcox , Kefeng Wang , Zi Yan , Alistair Popple , linux-mm@kvack.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: 1uwygnq9wujzm5y6ezzsy5wpaeise7pq X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 536821A0003 X-HE-Tag: 1704924892-161185 X-HE-Meta: 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 BWcAsN5C jEIsuREWSHWLe7THi89EurMATrAcvs8XK5xAi8iNGTV6cAg2GkoVjwz4YJH3Yjaqix3ar8HVMeh7YFVIiwVn4VDsOI+Lxu7JWagIkX1pBBIXqCfsFxKCIf0QaHN9KkzeGwE/gKRNe8Qhvk3t8NYVmUXRX7uuvmu3sM7HmPMvEEhc4QfF4HUtWPViPdoHuwhZbnDTYGrJ1RYCWMzIDEpDCUijpxUKVpGiiI95liQ2wJ7Ej1CB06rCxQwyAx+4c/k8S6GknX0fnaT0vK1Bi3SMJ+csIoOwt0b+fc7GVYAMkM+qnrhEpRfmO1WNv4m9g6JBy1+ye6+PUZ9/yrjyv2ytYCAHT9yXhftIN/oo2M9yAvCtVQGcwCyl3cB6iHoHrSGHxIRMNxV1CfZ+6RaXbVaogWQOzeoWQYRmB87FsdXsGUptHlYxe4r8IGimKzg== 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 Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 7:59=E2=80=AFPM Ryan Roberts = wrote: > > On 10/01/2024 11:38, Barry Song wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 7:21=E2=80=AFPM Ryan Roberts wrote: > >> > >> On 10/01/2024 11:00, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >>> On 10.01.24 11:55, Ryan Roberts wrote: > >>>> On 10/01/2024 10:42, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >>>>> On 10.01.24 11:38, Ryan Roberts wrote: > >>>>>> On 10/01/2024 10:30, Barry Song wrote: > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 6:23=E2=80=AFPM Ryan Roberts wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 10/01/2024 09:09, Barry Song wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 4:58=E2=80=AFPM Ryan Roberts wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 10/01/2024 08:02, Barry Song wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 12:16=E2=80=AFPM John Hubbard wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/9/24 19:51, Barry Song wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 11:35=E2=80=AFAM John Hubbard > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ryan, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> One thing that immediately came up during some recent test= ing of mTHP > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on arm64: the pid requirement is sometimes a little awkwar= d. I'm > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> running > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests on a machine at a time for now, inside various conta= iners and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> such, and it would be nice if there were an easy way to ge= t some > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the mTHPs across the whole machine. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Just to confirm, you're expecting these "global" stats be true= ly global > >>>>>>>>>> and not > >>>>>>>>>> per-container? (asking because you exploicitly mentioned being= in a > >>>>>>>>>> container). > >>>>>>>>>> If you want per-container, then you can probably just create t= he container > >>>>>>>>>> in a > >>>>>>>>>> cgroup? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure if that changes anything about thpmaps here. = Probably > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is fine as-is. But I wanted to give some initial reac= tions from > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just some quick runs: the global state would be convenient= . > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for taking this for a spin! Appreciate the feedback. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1. but this seems to be impossible by scanning pagemap? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> so may we add this statistics information in kernel just li= ke > >>>>>>>>>>>>> /proc/meminfo or a separate /proc/mthp_info? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. From my perspective, it looks like the global stats are= more useful > >>>>>>>>>>>> initially, and the more detailed per-pid or per-cgroup stats= are the > >>>>>>>>>>>> next level of investigation. So feels odd to start with the = more > >>>>>>>>>>>> detailed stats. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> probably because this can be done without the modification of= the kernel. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Yes indeed, as John said in an earlier thread, my previous att= empts to add > >>>>>>>>>> stats > >>>>>>>>>> directly in the kernel got pushback; DavidH was concerned that= we don't > >>>>>>>>>> really > >>>>>>>>>> know exectly how to account mTHPs yet > >>>>>>>>>> (whole/partial/aligned/unaligned/per-size/etc) so didn't want = to end up > >>>>>>>>>> adding > >>>>>>>>>> the wrong ABI and having to maintain it forever. There has als= o been some > >>>>>>>>>> pushback regarding adding more values to multi-value files in = sysfs, so > >>>>>>>>>> David > >>>>>>>>>> was suggesting coming up with a whole new scheme at some point= (I know > >>>>>>>>>> /proc/meminfo isn't sysfs, but the equivalent files for NUMA n= odes and > >>>>>>>>>> cgroups > >>>>>>>>>> do live in sysfs). > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Anyway, this script was my attempt to 1) provide a short term = solution > >>>>>>>>>> to the > >>>>>>>>>> "we need some stats" request and 2) provide a context in which= to explore > >>>>>>>>>> what > >>>>>>>>>> the right stats are - this script can evolve without the ABI p= roblem. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> The detailed per-pid or per-cgroup is still quite useful to m= y case in > >>>>>>>>>>> which > >>>>>>>>>>> we set mTHP enabled/disabled and allowed sizes according to v= ma types, > >>>>>>>>>>> eg. libc_malloc, java heaps etc. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Different vma types can have different anon_name. So I can us= e the > >>>>>>>>>>> detailed > >>>>>>>>>>> info to find out if specific VMAs have gotten mTHP properly a= nd how many > >>>>>>>>>>> they have gotten. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> However, Ryan did clearly say, above, "In future we may wish= to > >>>>>>>>>>>> introduce stats directly into the kernel (e.g. smaps or simi= lar)". And > >>>>>>>>>>>> earlier he ran into some pushback on trying to set up /proc = or /sys > >>>>>>>>>>>> values because this is still such an early feature. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if we could put the global stats in debugfs for now= ? That's > >>>>>>>>>>>> specifically supposed to be a "we promise *not* to keep this= ABI stable" > >>>>>>>>>>>> location. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Now that I think about it, I wonder if we can add a --global m= ode to the > >>>>>>>>>> script > >>>>>>>>>> (or just infer global when neither --pid nor --cgroup are prov= ided). I > >>>>>>>>>> think I > >>>>>>>>>> should be able to determine all the physical memory ranges fro= m > >>>>>>>>>> /proc/iomem, > >>>>>>>>>> then grab all the info we need from /proc/kpageflags. We shoul= d then be > >>>>>>>>>> able to > >>>>>>>>>> process it all in much the same way as for --pid/--cgroup and = provide the > >>>>>>>>>> same > >>>>>>>>>> stats, but it will apply globally. What do you think? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Having now thought about this for a few mins (in the shower, if = anyone wants > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> complete picture :) ), this won't quite work. This approach does= n't have the > >>>>>>>> virtual mapping information so the best it can do is tell us "ho= w many of > >>>>>>>> each > >>>>>>>> size of THP are allocated?" - it doesn't tell us anything about = whether they > >>>>>>>> are > >>>>>>>> fully or partially mapped or what their alignment is (all necess= ary if we > >>>>>>>> want > >>>>>>>> to know if they are contpte-mapped). So I don't think this appro= ach is > >>>>>>>> going to > >>>>>>>> be particularly useful. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> And this is also the big problem if we want to gather stats insi= de the > >>>>>>>> kernel; > >>>>>>>> if we want something equivalant to /proc/meminfo's > >>>>>>>> AnonHugePages/ShmemPmdMapped/FilePmdMapped, we need to consider = not just the > >>>>>>>> allocation of the THP but also whether it is mapped. That's easy= for > >>>>>>>> PMD-mappings, because there is only one entry to consider - when= you set it, > >>>>>>>> you > >>>>>>>> increment the number of PMD-mapped THPs, when you clear it, you = decrement. > >>>>>>>> But > >>>>>>>> for PTE-mappings it's harder; you know the size when you are map= ping so its > >>>>>>>> easy > >>>>>>>> to increment, but you can do a partial unmap, so you would need = to scan the > >>>>>>>> PTEs > >>>>>>>> to figure out if we are unmapping the first page of a previously > >>>>>>>> fully-PTE-mapped THP, which is expensive. We would need a cheap = mechanism to > >>>>>>>> determine "is this folio fully and contiguously mapped in at lea= st one > >>>>>>>> process?". > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> as OPPO's approach I shared to you before is maintaining two mapc= ount > >>>>>>> 1. entire map > >>>>>>> 2. subpage's map > >>>>>>> 3. if 1 and 2 both exist, it is DoubleMapped. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This isn't a problem for us. and everytime if we do a partial unm= ap, > >>>>>>> we have an explicit > >>>>>>> cont_pte split which will decrease the entire map and increase th= e > >>>>>>> subpage's mapcount. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> but its downside is that we expose this info to mm-core. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> OK, but I think we have a slightly more generic situation going on= with the > >>>>>> upstream; If I've understood correctly, you are using the PTE_CONT= bit in the > >>>>>> PTE to determne if its fully mapped? That works for your case wher= e you only > >>>>>> have 1 size of THP that you care about (contpte-size). But for the= upstream, we > >>>>>> have multi-size THP so we can't use the PTE_CONT bit to determine = if its fully > >>>>>> mapped because we can only use that bit if the THP is at least 64K= and aligned, > >>>>>> and only on arm64. We would need a SW bit for this purpose, and th= e mm would > >>>>>> need to update that SW bit for every PTE one the full -> partial m= ap > >>>>>> transition. > >>>>> > >>>>> Oh no. Let's not make everything more complicated for the purpose o= f some stats. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Indeed, I was intending to argue *against* doing it this way. Fundam= entally, if > >>>> we want to know what's fully mapped and what's not, then I don't see= any way > >>>> other than by scanning the page tables and we might as well do that = in user > >>>> space with this script. > >>>> > >>>> Although, I expect you will shortly make a proposal that is simple t= o implement > >>>> and prove me wrong ;-) > >>> > >>> Unlikely :) As you said, once you have multiple folio sizes, it stops= really > >>> making sense. > >>> > >>> Assume you have a 128 kiB pageache folio, and half of that is mapped.= You can > >>> set cont-pte bits on that half and all is fine. Or AMD can benefit fr= om it's > >>> optimizations without the cont-pte bit and everything is fine. > >> > >> Yes, but for debug and optimization, its useful to know when THPs are > >> fully/partially mapped, when they are unaligned etc. Anyway, the scrip= t does > >> that for us, and I think we are tending towards agreement that there a= re > >> unlikely to be any cost benefits by moving it into the kernel. > > > > frequent partial unmap can defeat all purpose for us to use large folio= s. > > just imagine a large folio can soon be splitted after it is formed. we = lose > > the performance gain and might get regression instead. > > nit: just because a THP gets partially unmapped in a process doesn't mean= it > gets split into order-0 pages. If the folio still has all its pages mappe= d at > least once then no further action is taken. If the page being unmapped wa= s the > last mapping of that page, then the THP is put on the deferred split queu= e, so > that it can be split in future if needed. > > > > and this can be very frequent, for example, one userspace heap manageme= nt > > is releasing memory page by page. > > > > In our real product deployment, we might not care about the second part= ial > > unmapped, we do care about the first partial unmapped as we can use th= is > > to know if split has ever happened on this large folios. an partial unm= apped > > subpage can be unlikely re-mapped back. > > > > so i guess 1st unmap is probably enough, at least for my product. I mea= n we > > care about if partial unmap has ever happened on a large folio more tha= n how > > they are exactly partially unmapped :-) > > I'm not sure what you are suggesting here? A global boolean that tells yo= u if > any folio in the system has ever been partially unmapped? That will almos= t > certainly always be true, even for a very well tuned system. not a global boolean but a per-folio boolean. in case userspace maps a regi= on and has no userspace management, then we are fine as it is unlikely to have partial unmap/map things; in case userspace maps a region, but manages it by itself, such as heap things, we might result in lots of partial map/unma= p, which can lead to 3 problems: 1. potential memory footprint increase, for example, while userspace releas= es some pages in a folio, we might still keep it as frequent splitting folio i= nto basepages and releasing the unmapped subpage might be too expensive. 2. if cont-pte is involved, frequent dropping cont-pte/tlb shootdown might happen. 3. other maintenance overhead such as splitting large folios etc. We'd like to know how serious partial map things are happening. so either we will disable mTHP in this kind of VMAs, or optimize userspace to do some alignment according to the size of large folios. in android phones, we detect lots of apps, and also found some apps might do things like 1. mprotect on some pages within a large folio 2. mlock on some pages within a large folio 3. madv_free on some pages within a large folio 4. madv_pageout on some pages within a large folio. it would be good if we have a per-folio boolean to know how serious userspa= ce is breaking the large folios. for example, if more than 50% folios in a vma= has this problem, we can find it out and take some action. Thanks Barry