Re: [PATCH v7] mm: Add PM_THP_MAPPED to /proc/pid/pagemap

[Mina Almasry <almasrymina@google.com>]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 2:03 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 01:47:33PM -0800, Mina Almasry wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 1:30 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > What I've been trying to communicate over the N reviews of this
> > > patch series is that *the same thing is about to happen to THPs*.
> > > Only more so.  THPs are going to be of arbitrary power-of-two size, not
> > > necessarily sizes supported by the hardware.  That means that we need to
> > > be extremely precise about what we mean by "is this a THP?"  Do we just
> > > mean "This is a compound page?"  Do we mean "this is mapped by a PMD?"
> > > Or do we mean something else?  And I feel like I haven't been able to
> > > get that information out of you.
> >
> > Yes, I'm very sorry for the trouble, but I'm also confused what the
> > disconnect is. To allocate hugepages I can do like so:
> >
> > mount -t tmpfs -o huge=always tmpfs /mnt/mytmpfs
> >
> > or
> >
> > madvise(..., MADV_HUGEPAGE)
> >
> > Note I don't ask the kernel for a specific size, or a specific mapping
> > mechanism (PMD/contig PTE/contig PMD/PUD), I just ask the kernel for
> > 'huge' pages. I would like to know whether the kernel was successful
> > in allocating a hugepage or not. Today a THP hugepage AFAICT is PMD
> > mapped + is_transparent_hugepage(), which is the check I have here. In
> > the future, THP may become an arbitrary power of two size, and I think
> > I'll need to update this querying interface once/if that gets merged
> > to the kernel. I.e, if in the future I allocate pages by using:
> >
> > mount -t tmpfs -o huge=2MB tmpfs /mnt/mytmpfs
> >
> > I need the kernel to tell me whether the mapping is 2MB size or not.
> >
> > If I allocate pages by using:
> >
> > mount -t tmpfs -o huge=pmd tmpfs /mnt/mytmps,
> >
> > Then I need the kernel to tell me whether the pages are PMD mapped or
> > not, as I'm doing here.
> >
> > The current implementation is based on what the current THP
> > implementation is in the kernel, and depending on future changes to
> > THP I may need to update it in the future. Does that make sense?
>
> Well, no.  You're adding (or changing, if you like) a userspace API.
> We need to be precise about what that userspace API *means*, so that we
> don't break it in the future when the implementation changes.  You're
> still being fuzzy above.
>
> I have no intention of adding an API like the ones you suggest above to
> allow the user to specify what size pages to use.  That seems very strange
> to me; how should the user (or sysadmin, or application) know what size is
> best for the kernel to use to cache files?  Instead, the kernel observes
> the usage pattern of the file (through the readahead mechanism) and grows
> the allocation size to fit what the kernel thinks will be most effective.
>
> I do honour some of the existing hints that userspace can provide; eg
> VM_HUGEPAGE makes the pagefault path allocate PMD sized pages (if it can).

Right, so since VM_HUGEPAGE makes the kernel allocate PMD mapped THP
if it can, then I want to know if the page is actually a PMD mapped
THP or not. The implementation and documentation that I'm adding seem
consistent with that AFAICT, but sorry if I missed something.

> But there's intentionally no new way to tell the kernel to use pages
> of a particular size.  The current implementation will use (at least)
> 64kB pages if you do reads in 64kB chunks, but that's not guaranteed.