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 61622C433F5 for ; Fri, 6 May 2022 16:59:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C5E8A6B0073; Fri, 6 May 2022 12:59:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C0D686B0074; Fri, 6 May 2022 12:59:05 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id AAF196B0075; Fri, 6 May 2022 12:59:05 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DC646B0073 for ; Fri, 6 May 2022 12:59:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay13.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6959761887 for ; Fri, 6 May 2022 16:59:05 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79435928250.19.B49E449 Received: from mail-pj1-f43.google.com (mail-pj1-f43.google.com [209.85.216.43]) by imf10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB026C0014 for ; Fri, 6 May 2022 16:58:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pj1-f43.google.com with SMTP id z5-20020a17090a468500b001d2bc2743c4so7397017pjf.0 for ; Fri, 06 May 2022 09:59:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=vj6XEbgIMbTr9+iA2bOkom4+D75tX0mB3fjbufS1Z10=; b=feRUWTCl2QMVdpXsrIM+3vZBL5P3h3/8Ynt3HSw+RVb8Y02b8BCzt/xxjdLZ+lm/rM MxAAwqTYNpSvPK6/3W9yBxyXkh9zW7dx2jk5najDR6j6DiCDrrz3BhFNkJVh9BpSQKE/ oh2OH0tjjQa/cOdARonIOidtJlBfLWgUxxHfj+Ghcs0+CZU90bK83a+SULYdKdNLlFy6 sZxdBhhkTG51p29v7+33fKAxQuKtL+YNZaB2y4zXM/0TZLrKce2isiaiFEyoqEnUzqbi daqyCXGSbWvY1LaZrbeKcEsTeYOkCuSsdUWWFcWc+JZ/O+dKbchnly84zJhQHHIbSyRc or7Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=vj6XEbgIMbTr9+iA2bOkom4+D75tX0mB3fjbufS1Z10=; b=mbv90YJRkkrYZFeUvAXxK+lWS4FioPx3DrJqpSfSQbXS9sfJ58h5oz3MMk6e28bLMH jcNGOy7yR9aYn5QhpKmO/wxi4o2XqxHuWOVc4L101ov1Dr+9xQbhgWCS92pG8U4GDgAx gl3feF7UfXVl/CZbEqzudZeDTetMZV8JiFehM34fVUVT+/sWWhkSknJ0J0aDxqzSOH4o DF1gTNq01aKDelxxZBUSVxcss7HnyT1kOaSOg4ryf4OhjtnvAVShOfRlW7+6M8d/eD2z EDqUnZkvfoeL5l4xSpQ56mSRKjNgnMHQfn3CSj1sCJh3Ak6jiDuhHd1HYp0uevx2z09/ SAVQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530LwQgUZbZExN7UqXNqwXyVhkLBBhFbvKd+WVsR/yfzkQDIadkO GRbOhwzoA4O4/rvqX+UYNug= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzHU6TTWVDjf/3gc99fKZkHMN+emRqleV7wQE2C9rolA5SwVurRJTfon78jncXjIJpVJqvGHg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3884:b0:1dc:5838:1bea with SMTP id mu4-20020a17090b388400b001dc58381beamr13187175pjb.90.1651856343692; Fri, 06 May 2022 09:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hyeyoo ([114.29.24.243]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q7-20020a170902dac700b0015e8d4eb2easm2008874plx.308.2022.05.06.09.58.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 06 May 2022 09:59:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 01:58:55 +0900 From: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> To: Mike Rapoport Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Andy Lutomirski , Dave Hansen , Ira Weiny , Kees Cook , Mike Rapoport , Peter Zijlstra , Rick Edgecombe , Vlastimil Babka , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Prototype for direct map awareness in page allocator Message-ID: References: <20220127085608.306306-1-rppt@kernel.org> <20220430134415.GA25819@ip-172-31-27-201.ap-northeast-1.compute.internal> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: DB026C0014 X-Stat-Signature: c9t89er47a7ux56aaoubrrp5bmewrs7o Authentication-Results: imf10.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=feRUWTCl; spf=pass (imf10.hostedemail.com: domain of 42.hyeyoo@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com X-HE-Tag: 1651856326-210132 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 Mon, May 02, 2022 at 09:44:48PM -0700, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 01:44:16PM +0000, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 06:21:57PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > Hello Hyeonggon, > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 05:54:49PM +0900, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:56:05AM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > > From: Mike Rapoport > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > This is a second attempt to make page allocator aware of the direct map > > > > > layout and allow grouping of the pages that must be mapped at PTE level in > > > > > the direct map. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello mike, It may be a silly question... > > > > > > > > Looking at implementation of set_memory*(), they only split > > > > PMD/PUD-sized entries. But why not _merge_ them when all entries > > > > have same permissions after changing permission of an entry? > > > > > > > > I think grouping __GFP_UNMAPPED allocations would help reducing > > > > direct map fragmentation, but IMHO merging split entries seems better > > > > to be done in those helpers than in page allocator. > > > > > > Maybe, I didn't got as far as to try merging split entries in the direct > > > map. IIRC, Kirill sent a patch for collapsing huge pages in the direct map > > > some time ago, but there still was something that had to initiate the > > > collapse. > > > > But in this case buddy allocator's view of direct map is quite limited. > > It cannot merge 2M entries to 1G entry as it does not support > > big allocations. Also it cannot merge entries of pages freed in boot process > > as they weren't allocated from page allocator. > > > > And it will become harder when pages in MIGRATE_UNMAPPED is borrowed > > from another migrate type.... > > > > So it would be nice if we can efficiently merge mappings in > > change_page_attr_set(). this approach can handle cases above. > > > > I think in this case grouping allocations and merging mappings > > should be done separately. > > I've added the provision to merge the mappings in __free_one_page() because > at that spot we know for sure we can replace multiple PTEs with a single > PMD. Actually no external merging mechanism is needed if CPA supports merging mappings. Recently I started to implement similar idea I described above. The approach is slightly different as it does not scan the page table but updates count of number of mappings that has non-standard protection bits. (being "non-standard" means pgprot is not equal to PAGE_KERNEL.) It increases split_count when standard mapping becomes non-standard and decreases split_count in the opposite case. It merges mappings when the count become zero. Updating counts and merging is invoked in __change_page_attr(), which is called by set_memory_{rw,ro}(), set_direct_map_{default,invalid}_noflush(), ... etc. The implementation looks like revert_page() function that existed in arch/i386/mm/pageattr.c decades ago... There are some issues like 1) set_memory_4k()-ed memory should not be merged and 2) we need to be extremely sure that the count is always valid. But I think this approach is definitely worth trying. I'll send a RFC versionin to list after a bit of more work. And still, I think grouping allocations using migrate type would work well with adding merging feature in CPA. Thanks! Hyeonggon > I'm not saying there should be no additional mechanism for collapsing > direct map pages, but I don't know when and how it should be invoked. > > > > > For example: > > > > 1) set_memory_ro() splits 1 RW PMD entry into 511 RW PTE > > > > entries and 1 RO PTE entry. > > > > > > > > 2) before freeing the pages, we call set_memory_rw() and we have > > > > 512 RW PTE entries. Then we can merge it to 1 RW PMD entry. > > > > > > For this we need to check permissions of all 512 pages to make sure we can > > > use a PMD entry to map them. > > > > Of course that may be slow. Maybe one way to optimize this is using some bits > > in struct page, something like: each bit of page->direct_map_split (unsigned long) > > is set when at least one entry in (PTRS_PER_PTE = 512)/(BITS_PER_LONG = 64) = 8 entries > > has special permissions. > > > > Then we just need to set the corresponding bit when splitting mappings and > > iterate 8 entries when changing permission back again. (and then unset the bit when 8 entries has > > usual permissions). we can decide to merge by checking if page->direct_map_split is zero. > > > > When scanning, 8 entries would fit into one cacheline. > > > > Any other ideas? > > > > > Not sure that doing the scan in each set_memory call won't cause an overall > > > slowdown. > > > > I think we can evaluate it by measuring boot time and bpf/module > > load/unload time. > > > > Is there any other workload that is directly affected > > by performance of set_memory*()? > > > > > > 3) after 2) we can do same thing about PMD-sized entries > > > > and merge them into 1 PUD entry if 512 PMD entries have > > > > same permissions. > > > > [...] > > > > > Mike Rapoport (3): > > > > > mm/page_alloc: introduce __GFP_UNMAPPED and MIGRATE_UNMAPPED > > > > > mm/secretmem: use __GFP_UNMAPPED to allocate pages > > > > > EXPERIMENTAL: x86/module: use __GFP_UNMAPPED in module_alloc > > > > -- > > > > Thanks, > > > > Hyeonggon > > > > > > -- > > > Sincerely yours, > > > Mike. > > -- > Sincerely yours, > Mike. -- Thanks, Hyeonggon