From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Vishal Moola <vishal.moola@gmail.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
"Yin, Fengwei" <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
Subject: Folio mapcount
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 18:13:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y9Afwds/Jl39UjEp@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
Once we get to the part of the folio journey where we have
one-pointer-per-page, we can't afford to maintain per-page state.
Currently we maintain a per-page mapcount, and that will have to go.
We can maintain extra state for a multi-page folio, but it has to be a
constant amount of extra state no matter how many pages are in the folio.
My proposal is that we maintain a single mapcount per folio, and its
definition is the number of (vma, page table) tuples which have a
reference to any pages in this folio.
I think there's a good performance win and simplification to be had
here, so I think it's worth doing for 6.4.
Examples
--------
In the simple and common case where every page in a folio is mapped
once by a single vma and single page table, mapcount would be 1 [1].
If the folio is mapped across a page table boundary by a single VMA,
after we take a page fault on it in one page table, it gets a mapcount
of 1. After taking a page fault on it in the other page table, its
mapcount increases to 2.
For a PMD-sized THP naturally aligned, mapcount is 1. Splitting the
PMD into PTEs would not change the mapcount; the folio remains order-9
but it stll has a reference from only one page table (a different page
table, but still just one).
Implementation sketch
---------------------
When we take a page fault, we can/should map every page in the folio
that fits in this VMA and this page table. We do this at present in
filemap_map_pages() by looping over each page in the folio and calling
do_set_pte() on each. We should have a:
do_set_pte_range(vmf, folio, addr, first_page, n);
and then change the API to page_add_new_anon_rmap() / page_add_file_rmap()
to pass in (folio, first, n) instead of page. That gives us one call to
page_add_*_rmap() per (vma, page table) tuple.
In try_to_unmap_one(), page_vma_mapped_walk() currently calls us for
each pfn. We'll want a function like
page_vma_mapped_walk_skip_to_end_of_ptable()
in order to persuade it to only call us once or twice if the folio
is mapped across a page table boundary.
Concerns
--------
We'll have to be careful to always zap all the PTEs for a given (vma,
pt) tuple at the same time, otherwise mapcount will get out of sync
(eg map three pages, unmap two; we shouldn't decrement the mapcount,
but I don't think we can know that. But does this ever happen? I think
we always unmap the entire folio, like in try_to_unmap_one().
I haven't got my head around SetPageAnonExclusive() yet. I think it can
be a per-folio bit, but handling a folio split across two page tables
may be tricky.
Notes
-----
[1] Ignoring the bias by -1 to let us detect transitions that we care
about more efficiently; I'm talking about the value returned from
page_mapcount(), not the value stored in page->_mapcount.
next reply other threads:[~2023-01-24 18:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-24 18:13 Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2023-01-24 18:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-01-24 18:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-01-24 18:35 ` Yang Shi
2023-02-02 3:45 ` Mike Kravetz
2023-02-02 15:31 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-07 16:19 ` Zi Yan
2023-02-07 16:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-06 20:34 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-06 22:55 ` Yang Shi
2023-02-06 23:09 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-07 3:06 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-02-07 4:08 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-07 22:39 ` Peter Xu
2023-02-07 23:27 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-08 19:40 ` Peter Xu
2023-02-08 20:25 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-08 20:58 ` Peter Xu
2023-02-09 15:10 ` Chih-En Lin
2023-02-09 15:43 ` Peter Xu
2023-02-07 22:56 ` James Houghton
2023-02-07 23:08 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-07 23:27 ` James Houghton
2023-02-07 23:35 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-08 0:35 ` James Houghton
2023-02-08 2:26 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-07 16:23 ` Zi Yan
2023-02-07 16:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-08 19:36 ` Zi Yan
2023-02-08 19:54 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-02-10 15:15 ` Zi Yan
2023-03-29 14:02 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-01 1:17 ` Zi Yan
2023-07-02 9:50 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-02 11:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-02 12:26 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-07-03 20:54 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-02 19:51 ` Zi Yan
2023-07-03 1:09 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-03 13:24 ` Zi Yan
2023-07-03 20:46 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-04 1:22 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-04 2:25 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-07-03 21:09 ` David Hildenbrand
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-12-15 21:55 folio mapcount Matthew Wilcox
2021-12-16 9:37 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2021-12-16 13:56 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-12-16 15:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-12-16 15:54 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-12-16 16:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-12-16 17:01 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-12-16 18:56 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
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=Y9Afwds/Jl39UjEp@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=vishal.moola@gmail.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