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 9004CC433EF for ; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 02:01:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id BFA326B0071; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:01:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id B826C6B0073; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:01:54 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 9AE516B0074; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:01:54 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84CF26B0071 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:01:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5868020875 for ; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 02:01:54 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79586076948.28.4038A98 Received: from mail-ej1-f53.google.com (mail-ej1-f53.google.com [209.85.218.53]) by imf22.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD176C0099 for ; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 02:01:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ej1-f53.google.com with SMTP id m20so6019701ejj.10 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 19:01:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+ZWFGyn7QgVdaJhnOjMHTVAP7/rq34baWPijoUd4nzQ=; b=pEQS/aUuATRXcBxCdHguz7Q69pwt/BR7rOMmd/wTznMuK6YcHBylUynztCs7pBAojN ICu+0dCKYlvq/7ZQ3wruORkm9uVSlW0qkNyJEzSqkP9M+PZt+5eVAidm98LV0rWslf8X TFVXNobpRGyuhIIMgLbC+PKHkgXdq89Dxzx/VR8HMinZgtgyKtLZvZpEVwaYQDAGdXNq OLFRX0j2PIdfTYHAckmQH2XJK2aQMAsGyK00lwOpW8G0dahewGDU1SPvJFcPvtlZBL0F 2LV97P1sICVcuUQ0oUPaI4apMEOSVfiAbjN0qv/wd/gOH/Lb5vpQeD2w8EIcNFmxRZ+g FGJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+ZWFGyn7QgVdaJhnOjMHTVAP7/rq34baWPijoUd4nzQ=; b=0j+DlKlPqO13p3DzaHiCNOyFYXBqIEVEcnaF4QPM++tG5Jsk3wvhf3OrmJHaCjixJu ioTnIkG/Eh2dp2B4UqVRkuSeTYkUs1J2NNYr9FS4qT3Ynwn2WSFVxSRjqVuctDCRxkNK HGtYZD8pqAFZ8moGWr3NVgjv9pvXW2LQTedhpuTpys+FiwhTllzNHfE6E1FRLCvgJcBk vZLddk9EostR6tceh3jEHo9f9WtdNYNOWFy3L71JXdYlSBYejPWBuqYUqOUJJiU/ZvhG 4Pm/UHEwB+BwXwqm2lfSyJGoAEpj+Ssn9zhgRlkOl1Ikw35NN0fU6rPR3e4VvgrpbDRy ZX+w== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+qXKdvDQqWKK12MujU3dlXgFayGRxue78cWEK60gUj0icBspO/ AFoqsLBsRXGcTyQGKgihGCga0I44s6SKU9TpkC4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vVyIsKJw9H/tcjBSXf1jBRn6lZFot31skzhbW0DfrFe0jxPnpK+RnRf/F0ajiLENDUYm7KBqkqda5HIuhVh40= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:9715:b0:711:ca06:ca50 with SMTP id jg21-20020a170907971500b00711ca06ca50mr7101055ejc.192.1655431312299; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 19:01:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220518014632.922072-1-yuzhao@google.com> <20220518014632.922072-8-yuzhao@google.com> <20220607102135.GA32448@willie-the-truck> <20220607104358.GA32583@willie-the-truck> In-Reply-To: From: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 14:01:41 +1200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 07/14] mm: multi-gen LRU: exploit locality in rmap To: Yu Zhao Cc: Linus Torvalds , Will Deacon , Andrew Morton , Linux-MM , Andi Kleen , Aneesh Kumar , Catalin Marinas , Dave Hansen , Hillf Danton , Jens Axboe , Johannes Weiner , Jonathan Corbet , Matthew Wilcox , Mel Gorman , Michael Larabel , Michal Hocko , Mike Rapoport , Peter Zijlstra , Tejun Heo , Vlastimil Babka , LAK , Linux Doc Mailing List , LKML , x86 , Kernel Page Reclaim v2 , Brian Geffon , Jan Alexander Steffens , Oleksandr Natalenko , Steven Barrett , Suleiman Souhlal , Daniel Byrne , Donald Carr , =?UTF-8?Q?Holger_Hoffst=C3=A4tte?= , Konstantin Kharlamov , Shuang Zhai , Sofia Trinh , Vaibhav Jain , huzhanyuan@oppo.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1655431313; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=VfhOnglymWylfIb+TubRmTKX6429nRzKzGPU6ugqazt2i8UGeXlWlcKZ6RPRPSV2+cgnd6 jaxGECeegTxyk5rdHij3tDa6Ust9uP+Dbzn5siDspYK0bl60qj3eRbu1JmhpMD4+2eEP7+ BXB/taxEuQoyjcg06vOsNYvDz9TNNSE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b="pEQS/aUu"; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of 21cnbao@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=21cnbao@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1655431313; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=+ZWFGyn7QgVdaJhnOjMHTVAP7/rq34baWPijoUd4nzQ=; b=DgvLEmoPlDceTWMtbhAEAp2UufzdM3OzsyvqrbpKlNXZVWQDBtgCLtLYSv81otvpDTeL6O qiqRcQL4aJhH5JhAqaFrIDUvYgagNpOtTBtOYjUIM0/fZZ+23DCpaAVQvIcWrIO4t3k/NN 0XhLdxN+txducAjYiedZCq0nVi42c68= X-Stat-Signature: ogpun1h3peqy4aaqn1hs71pcgz9titmb X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: CD176C0099 Authentication-Results: imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b="pEQS/aUu"; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of 21cnbao@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=21cnbao@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1655431313-766486 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: On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 1:43 PM Yu Zhao wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 5:29 PM Yu Zhao wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 4:33 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 9:56 AM Yu Zhao wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 4:46 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 3:52 AM Linus Torvalds > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 5:43 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Given we used to have a flush for clear pte young in LRU, right now we are > > > > > > > moving to nop in almost all cases for the flush unless the address becomes > > > > > > > young exactly after look_around and before ptep_clear_flush_young_notify. > > > > > > > It means we are actually dropping flush. So the question is, were we > > > > > > > overcautious? we actually don't need the flush at all even without mglru? > > > > > > > > > > > > We stopped flushing the TLB on A bit clears on x86 back in 2014. > > > > > > > > > > > > See commit b13b1d2d8692 ("x86/mm: In the PTE swapout page reclaim case > > > > > > clear the accessed bit instead of flushing the TLB"). > > > > > > > > > > This is true for x86, RISC-V, powerpc and S390. but it is not true for > > > > > most platforms. > > > > > > > > > > There was an attempt to do the same thing in arm64: > > > > > https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1793830.html > > > > > but arm64 still sent a nosync tlbi and depent on a deferred to dsb : > > > > > https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1794484.html > > > > > > > > Barry, you've already answered your own question. > > > > > > > > Without commit 07509e10dcc7 arm64: pgtable: Fix pte_accessible(): > > > > #define pte_accessible(mm, pte) \ > > > > - (mm_tlb_flush_pending(mm) ? pte_present(pte) : pte_valid_young(pte)) > > > > + (mm_tlb_flush_pending(mm) ? pte_present(pte) : pte_valid(pte)) > > > > > > > > You missed all TLB flushes for PTEs that have gone through > > > > ptep_test_and_clear_young() on the reclaim path. But most of the time, > > > > you got away with it, only occasional app crashes: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAGsJ_4w6JjuG4rn2P=d974wBOUtXUUnaZKnx+-G6a8_mSROa+Q@mail.gmail.com/ > > > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > Yes. On the arm64 platform, ptep_test_and_clear_young() without flush > > > can cause random > > > App to crash. > > > ptep_test_and_clear_young() + flush won't have this kind of crashes though. > > > But after applying commit 07509e10dcc7 arm64: pgtable: Fix > > > pte_accessible(), on arm64, > > > ptep_test_and_clear_young() without flush won't cause App to crash. > > > > > > ptep_test_and_clear_young(), with flush, without commit 07509e10dcc7: OK > > > ptep_test_and_clear_young(), without flush, with commit 07509e10dcc7: OK > > > ptep_test_and_clear_young(), without flush, without commit 07509e10dcc7: CRASH > > > > I agree -- my question was rhetorical :) > > > > I was trying to imply this logic: > > 1. We cleared the A-bit in PTEs with ptep_test_and_clear_young() > > 2. We missed TLB flush for those PTEs on the reclaim path, i.e., case > > 3 (case 1 & 2 guarantee flushes) > > 3. We saw crashes, but only occasionally > > > > Assuming TLB cached those PTEs, we would have seen the crashes more > > often, which contradicts our observation. So the conclusion is TLB > > didn't cache them most of the time, meaning flushing TLB just for the > > sake of the A-bit isn't necessary. > > > > > do you think it is safe to totally remove the flush code even for > > > the original > > > LRU? > > > > Affirmative, based on not only my words, but 3rd parties': > > 1. Your (indirect) observation > > 2. Alexander's benchmark: > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/BYAPR12MB271295B398729E07F31082A7CFAA0@BYAPR12MB2712.namprd12.prod.outlook.com/ > > 3. The fundamental hardware limitation in terms of the TLB scalability > > (Fig. 1): https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/osdi02/tech/full_papers/navarro/navarro.pdf > > 4. Intel's commit b13b1d2d8692 ("x86/mm: In the PTE swapout page > reclaim case clear the accessed bit instead of flushing the TLB") Hi Yu, I am going to send a RFC based on the above discussion. diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c index 5bcb334cd6f2..7ce6f0b6c330 100644 --- a/mm/rmap.c +++ b/mm/rmap.c @@ -830,7 +830,7 @@ static bool folio_referenced_one(struct folio *folio, } if (pvmw.pte) { - if (ptep_clear_flush_young_notify(vma, address, + if (ptep_clear_young_notify(vma, address, pvmw.pte)) { /* * Don't treat a reference through Thanks Barry