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 BA80ECA1005 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2024 15:34:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3E9566B009F; Fri, 30 Aug 2024 11:34:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 398AA6B00EF; Fri, 30 Aug 2024 11:34:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 2609C6B00C0; Fri, 30 Aug 2024 11:34:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08E946B0178 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2024 11:34:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin26.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78E5BC19A7 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2024 15:34:30 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82509308700.26.B2BFE4C Received: from mail-lj1-f180.google.com (mail-lj1-f180.google.com [209.85.208.180]) by imf05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98494100014 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2024 15:34:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf05.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20230601 header.b=oL3+wyc7; spf=pass (imf05.hostedemail.com: domain of dmatlack@google.com designates 209.85.208.180 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=dmatlack@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1725032047; 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=fpS42aX0b5K/b3Q1uAIPaQJhJiOQBXKx/N3vFKIRp18=; b=JViEs4kZx4d0oaibP4jJOK/pjpZJjuWquCneiqKyAwJ7Zh3EUQss2VcamwRL99d8Wprr3h vGIW1rNfBrv01K5x7S5E7w1f/meeBkyWG6D3Ifjyx0+pzCo1LMSr6TQ1b5mjfBlUjheMrC q/huUK/MHDxKdwQg1znkAdXbq63SfWk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf05.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20230601 header.b=oL3+wyc7; spf=pass (imf05.hostedemail.com: domain of dmatlack@google.com designates 209.85.208.180 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=dmatlack@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1725032047; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=YVmwUFOsfcfdXQMTN3zzdxfEBxOmglmGXu10kEoTNGS+pX3LcHmmxDLcAhnZ5EuCbEja5j GZfoL7v/zM4a1qtMPBDNX4HOCii8GAUYuPBfsAa/LydctBKKL5wdkTZ1Vp4AFr3oLUQme1 +CN2RHUv5+9dCV3w37oHLAILMMEytSY= Received: by mail-lj1-f180.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2f50966c478so19698931fa.1 for ; Fri, 30 Aug 2024 08:34:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1725032067; x=1725636867; 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=fpS42aX0b5K/b3Q1uAIPaQJhJiOQBXKx/N3vFKIRp18=; b=oL3+wyc7dwqUNBrUbd0TaW9nySwmldwf0Qf2JH6aG7UP3cMqERu0f0KbB3+7IIy0JR CC+9UKQ/OMEHPGDnfecsrPT+qYBTVmwMlPPxUPPaSN5L7r9gCzqBRaiyPQtnFi2BvJVu YdI4fMqBxdWRLOdZIKu461Qpa5+xEVlcUuWEDzSe8qE1utUAU4l6AxmswHsWzIijMNub BVj5bNGdHDJWRlsnGdHtdFIUZCzUUQzO0MXnKYLjkgDsdRZ2vvCqAL6JU2E61AlJsaJM Z6mqWCxLBU1oJTS+fVOLdDfmHkyjm9vjps6Fu4ry7dE1QZeAMHihySfrpDhUsDdK25PE fVyw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1725032067; x=1725636867; 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=fpS42aX0b5K/b3Q1uAIPaQJhJiOQBXKx/N3vFKIRp18=; b=JAMGL3diNDjIRW1pEYhlC1kleoSi+nGBCoj1wc+9rUkdvQOC+oVC46WkXthQyHEsO8 03vqHKBqygEyD7v56/K7odqQ42yaZwf90cImUjG0adXuNDr0pj+fFKQ4aSzdrT1ASWxX O925Euh2er02eemb/2eJJT/FgS1yDd4E0QdURoXdc4V8gMW5prMBd9KnVISb6zakbDqj xwUKSxoxiD4AHeBWgtOGC3b6w5drAF6DjZ7O6McmBmLFVU1ohVI22z0N5zxepBlM2Ddg u1Wi71BAF/O3x7LCE7eXSKlrdUnaDATN0Mn9nW0sRwDqUjr+rDjz1PjFf3LRbhKxOlmi T/MQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXIMIjJGtB63PevkgFRNfZy0ZNyHO9LnNTlQMmBNTIB+C6uLGI01KSksRkifMsAPdFMGOjRYhm/Ug==@kvack.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyUABHgv6b2Afqj9EE/XVM3YOfaXpafMlNtepH5jUa755SfncQ/ VkEr3M9/Q/urKtO/4Bl3j0aEJXaigVn4LiD4mSLfbey+gbmo8ohtrWiKGKT+cGz4BlRtoRT7FNb f4jknr2OL+gGKJm6Caw2yQKsDISKJN0/9gQRm X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGwBJXtOV0i3GYyRTdCgSnRpiivnFkx2coVNIZMzMIKNaMNwsMNP5zJF5zp0+JOd+xMSn0E3uXDKUV2VAuZcjg= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a544:0:b0:2f3:f39f:3719 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2f61e0a5143mr23582771fa.29.1725032066374; Fri, 30 Aug 2024 08:34:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240724011037.3671523-1-jthoughton@google.com> <20240724011037.3671523-4-jthoughton@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Matlack Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 08:33:59 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/11] KVM: arm64: Relax locking for kvm_test_age_gfn and kvm_age_gfn To: Oliver Upton Cc: James Houghton , Yu Zhao , Sean Christopherson , Andrew Morton , Paolo Bonzini , Ankit Agrawal , Axel Rasmussen , Catalin Marinas , David Rientjes , James Morse , Jason Gunthorpe , Jonathan Corbet , Marc Zyngier , Raghavendra Rao Ananta , Ryan Roberts , Shaoqin Huang , Suzuki K Poulose , Wei Xu , Will Deacon , Zenghui Yu , kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: cixxephntiz8jixkjc8z4d1z8fdiycqm X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 98494100014 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-HE-Tag: 1725032068-98146 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX1/rrnbVlfdiY8iH864PUUUIfGDhlo2Td/eLWHafG+uvD188YuhU2DSar/qX2oRjVgQZ/NSW8aJGB6mE+0zyKd9Oo+MM9zqtlpSsgssP0iLcFJP7HhdYp51zIje/V2aaV5rCorSVg83zfkkL2RZ9Vspy15/nBlFI7iPNWRcjgR/mobzeCxsGM1xUCqSxcG1qj+hHg0GlmCztSk95fOIpuVWbrrLFx/QPjzgswqz3pSVh+iyH60lLcc53tSIty1ngXGbNKdmk1mVmq+quLOCPUoJTybfndEkV4opx2ien39f/Fa3lRkWBb26zVmsj90M0S+MsOEgFnKxihFqimwW0X+3Ue+7Atpchik3NjVNXASA9F4Wbis7nvIqNBCXOUzuXdrC8SAsTE0RZ2ZUqGHf8af40dwQj1CnubbrFhjiOQHFAab1RGMifA1+nK58xUlZkTsdjvnAeNBJ/jDCpySJabKzy6yfsRvybDMDHtJV51ZyclPsIZl/JTwtwKg6nDF0JIf2XTe1bBMKU9v4wh2G+mLW5eCvPO90Uxz5xmEBsiMmfafhz+CG1XIgDFXqnERXFPk6aZFVgfqR3mmN1ZUoMZ+a7MFKSXX0GAvH0uRAQcUuXeeU6zdLoCDUWbU17YQzY2UsKY4pejltxmdyfY+fjNdNOWhTXnqdJeKJmFuR5Wa7OZhAr/Gtwdh/xVHF9TVQMRXlUVQYd3qtN4ZrXFsYqRjVLXLgGiKg+tdtsHzm/SrbyIAFwSJxDVO0/6csD4cswlu6yuG07ILmSTan3RvA0ONHOLF2oy9BOM0wODR/6qb2NVuOVC26zCl9aWN53UkyHH0TfFPnGRm5jzBFYXk2KbTUMaIHSbT4Rbd1N4FZCAVTDXTW+McAS0yAzs4f82ykEbNH+7YHrlTquaRDQnlcegIdTvekE4CKF4Oo45AQRap6yiybFNqm0yxFzobwcHeUV9RvXCkQ7Uib /QgxR6me Ho1jwQaIIQDAukh8TPndmwxkSOz7AX6R2ldGBZV0uxxYGLwo221+35mhaHU7bocgLueG5/1YT8oVbBOaadfo3Nlx+qiD0hjxlwjb6kPM5chR3HvmmYzF1KiEEp7SuDDPJXp+X3FnyZrM8D0c1iXxL28nE4n3x3+u8EvSkB9Fu/rfLKr8Za+W5iWXeZoDaxOBwB0RyvWz5Ga57LpEyAddT/fq32pvCsOEgH6S6l2sFa8i6ZvudpfUa+xVVfA== 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 Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 5:48=E2=80=AFPM Oliver Upton wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 05:33:00PM -0700, James Houghton wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 1:42=E2=80=AFPM Oliver Upton wrote: > > > Asking since you had a setup / data earlier on when you were carrying > > > the series. Hopefully with supportive data we can get arm64 to opt-in > > > to HAVE_KVM_MMU_NOTIFIER_YOUNG_FAST_ONLY as well. > > > > I'll keep trying some other approaches I can take for getting similar > > testing that Yu had; it is somewhat difficult for me to reproduce > > those tests (and it really shouldn't be.... sorry). > > No need to apologize. Getting good test hardware for arm64 is a complete > chore. Sure would love a functional workstation with cores from this > decade... > > > I think it makes most sense for me to drop the arm64 patch for now and > > re-propose it (or something stronger) alongside enabling aging. Does > > that sound ok? > > I'm a bit disappointed that we haven't gotten forward progress on the > arm64 patches, but I also recognize this is the direction of travel as > the x86 patches are shaping up. > > So yeah, I'm OK with it, but I'd love to get the arm64 side sorted out > soon while the context is still fresh. Converting the aging notifiers to holding mmu_lock for read seems like a pure win and minimal churn. Can we keep that patch in v7 (which depends on the lockless notifier refactor, i.e. is not completely stand-alone)? We can revisit enabling MGLRU on arm64 in a subsequent series. > > -- > Thanks, > Oliver