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 84895C0218B for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 14:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id F31316B007B; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:56:05 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EB9A66B0083; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:56:05 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D33326B0085; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:56:05 -0500 (EST) 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 B099A6B007B for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:56:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin01.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2344CC123C for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 14:56:05 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83039016690.01.CAE24E7 Received: from mail-qv1-f43.google.com (mail-qv1-f43.google.com [209.85.219.43]) by imf18.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19A751C0009 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 14:56:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf18.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gourry.net header.s=google header.b=YzboVEM7; spf=pass (imf18.hostedemail.com: domain of gourry@gourry.net designates 209.85.219.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gourry@gourry.net; dmarc=none ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1737644163; 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=pIwVMJKPo71eSxVfX67ulub1Z6p//x0W7IgkyVzME2g=; b=ejsPjNb4c5OePV/7njrjwdG+kVrBAMTyaQoGbBI4Ec8GUfS/CtQ+slwghp4lAxGoje5ROW biNUNOS1/d+NCRduzNmX1aqtk0+dds60lBsUiH08MdqkZNy65Bi92lvL3q0u6TphqLdEwu MMS8m7NtquhmxwbErejByas6VnUUbcc= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf18.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gourry.net header.s=google header.b=YzboVEM7; spf=pass (imf18.hostedemail.com: domain of gourry@gourry.net designates 209.85.219.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gourry@gourry.net; dmarc=none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1737644163; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Z9oFZl5NLCIRwy6Ci5PJCWuTC/LQm7iPlicVFG4NTAn/esqQCsaHQUJbVrUOJM1sguFYSS nEe7RePccMe6wPX6Fz9c84oDg0pezbkjCM1yTucO+Q7vWMAZ48qG7JF6agee1KZPzMJD/M 2inVw2E4xU7XmmwaXR10o+ryJ98iB+8= Received: by mail-qv1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6dd5c544813so11017506d6.1 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 06:56:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gourry.net; s=google; t=1737644162; x=1738248962; darn=kvack.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=pIwVMJKPo71eSxVfX67ulub1Z6p//x0W7IgkyVzME2g=; b=YzboVEM7//QDdECkEBZvrbMB8do0rWCpq6P+NyjIy79KBAZ01zoFN9YvZOG6ygcYwS MdIYx4pwjHLf1sDs9ZIwDmpWOag6bcHa4006R9mn1+z6LpiEo35trdvLBMvHV2p4J0vW KcLutK2ereuQYVmVBeb4MaFXITTEBResz0ybPfX22V4sYKxanMMSvhplCIZrCTq5qZVi Rp5ZLg7Zo8kX5wFJCk61A2TFGp/e5xECtmQYavKwhhkMZm6jeyaABAHor2jnqinfY3rZ YsPQgKnRXqV8MB+BE853J+KWV5nT/0MH5g/udu2t/XSupF2KrCLeWCp0yNomNoLYbyP5 a5Fg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1737644162; x=1738248962; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=pIwVMJKPo71eSxVfX67ulub1Z6p//x0W7IgkyVzME2g=; b=HHfbTFSG1OL7MjVxFwFWd8WqZu18+27oc8kaiKhGwjF95w+ywZu+tuNdu8XF/TDuuN HVvPaVYKWKJXSC5+p4Us4rHbUukgJ+IUSEZt5YEevKco9RUaXO3JnluwOC5X+iS5c4TT IBcf/Qg/cG7evGFxGW/in0o7ssDPyiIJ5g3iJFxdY8HCWLumlst8YtS3rhU3V5Gb1SnT /18APhsj4g1NFW7fzxbDad16A9CwvmpZEcDEuCrfKxsD3rIh/nqzrS/MiHkcgoCRI0Z6 p/sEfSM5lQ8dV5bxhJzc3ZZEg6zhwUmTjgQCjLCu/nXLHwQUFtv2BV/pS9u+CJ/js+EA ziWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxGssUl7mgLRgc+OBpAeYOQOIi0zLNIrYT19lB3g8aJ2gBiJXxn 0gIjC+T8fIoW4Gdb+vgpmplbKuoE/QQlU3ZtY2sUzJKphjutbonp+TR3006ntB0= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctfuC+lZkN1sAt++tXz+wFMA8rsgNzD6NDx4kZM36fTNF1OXF+nqz4ShbZ836i gaVs6Gu8KBM8aUKilHPCHZJ7nKIWCfdvTz78JI4Lm2GRr6e7frRSZK5XVHR0SgvxyU5ilMnIxaw OZrmFEAMOwnI0L9oIkq8Tiz324U074xHZGHt4CGTb0yvpWN6lxnI/k6JApg6VdywCX4iM57fvOf unrKQUjSTihrJaG50o6Xx5Lwr4+glpJ5B6nq0tbQNC7WWkiK7dATeNI+cfjdPThTAq/xDDTkfaw EgbIlY66A3NbgQKrLQ90jqSUm43n1pW2YVpQrg+uDu3NX4lKyaY7hG5AWw8N3co= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGurXFrWCspoHbEh5zBy16e7yYpuj/I1/46A8TasxdptOCyhfgUgagF6nJKPP9wQs/0DqSBiA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:240b:b0:6df:97a3:5e76 with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6e1b21d13e5mr423495526d6.27.1737644162006; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 06:56:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from gourry-fedora-PF4VCD3F (pool-173-79-56-208.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [173.79.56.208]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-6e1ccacdbafsm48001476d6.24.2025.01.23.06.56.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 23 Jan 2025 06:56:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 09:55:58 -0500 From: Gregory Price To: "Huang, Ying" Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, nehagholkar@meta.com, abhishekd@meta.com, david@redhat.com, nphamcs@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, kbusch@meta.com, feng.tang@intel.com, donettom@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC v3 PATCH 0/5] Promotion of Unmapped Page Cache Folios. Message-ID: References: <20250107000346.1338481-1-gourry@gourry.net> <87v7u7gkuk.fsf@DESKTOP-5N7EMDA> <87y0z2jiom.fsf@DESKTOP-5N7EMDA> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87y0z2jiom.fsf@DESKTOP-5N7EMDA> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 19A751C0009 X-Stat-Signature: o6r9edeicayzregd9ntqfz97oezex6or X-Rspamd-Server: rspam08 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1737644162-211739 X-HE-Meta: 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 t6RGyQjq RQtmIgejmGz00HtWNOCDsFTSEs9eKvCkK5oMdN7IZzOPLMx4+UF+/C8nzFVQ9wzgBpAwrEkC5vgI21sEE3QkIJDGnF0pQn2DMfc5BC8pE1lDzM5nzkgP5Jepo/FPIiUtzgBicfeu6O/+5aCQCQKA3Oc9jtIATmfbnwUKf1TFLskrY6wpzfA732djU2adFm2v2Xb6YB82RCsa+dph6FVBC0eP5ys50mju2airNVxasiTY+RCtFcoIbcEjrKHbV7lc+0nBUvuemDjsl5jeE/DlRozeGj1av7aYOkE64a+DLepE4uoQyG3eRrfeyTGIxgUjHYMdjgq7GijFG5q2DWNNc0K2nZhMe8N+l34NY49r9/vH/2LIRvCznmwVwFlMxDcHSlQ30 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.002106, 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, Jan 23, 2025 at 11:46:49AM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote: > Gregory Price writes: > > Test 2 shows overhead of TPP on + pagecache promo off > > Test 3 shows overhead of TPP+Promo on, but all the memory is on top tier > > > > This shows the check as to whether the folio is in the top tier is > > actually somewhat expensive (~5% compared to baseline, ~2.7% compared to > > TPP-on Promo-off). > > This is unexpected. Can we try to optimize it? For example, via using > a nodemask? node_is_toptier() is used in the mapped pages promotion > too (1 vs. 2 above). I guess that the optimization can reduce the > overhead there with measurable difference too. > Agreed it surprised me a bit as well. But more surprising is the fact that test 2 was also 2-3% slower given that it's a simple boolean check against whether tiering is turned on. I suppose that since the test is blowing up the cache/tlb by design, multiple additional cache/tlb misses could cause a non-trivial slowdown, but it is certainly a small puzzle I haven't dug into yet. ~Gregory