From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
yuzhao@google.com, ryan.roberts@arm.com, shy828301@gmail.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] support large folio for mlock
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2023 18:26:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZKhK1Ic1KCdOLRYm@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230707165221.4076590-1-fengwei.yin@intel.com>
On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 12:52:18AM +0800, Yin Fengwei wrote:
> This series identified the large folio for mlock to two types:
> - The large folio is in VM_LOCKED VMA range
> - The large folio cross VM_LOCKED VMA boundary
This is somewhere that I think our fixation on MUST USE PMD ENTRIES
has led us astray. Today when the arguments to mlock() cross a folio
boundary, we split the PMD entry but leave the folio intact. That means
that we continue to manage the folio as a single entry on the LRU list.
But userspace may have no idea that we're doing this. It may have made
several calls to mmap() 256kB at once, they've all been coalesced into
a single VMA and khugepaged has come along behind its back and created
a 2MB THP. Now userspace calls mlock() and instead of treating that as
a hint that oops, maybe we shouldn't've done that, we do our utmost to
preserve the 2MB folio.
I think this whole approach needs rethinking. IMO, anonymous folios
should not cross VMA boundaries. Tell me why I'm wrong.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-07 17:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-07 16:52 Yin Fengwei
2023-07-07 16:52 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] mm: add function folio_in_range() Yin Fengwei
2023-07-08 5:47 ` Yu Zhao
2023-07-08 6:44 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-07 16:52 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] mm: handle large folio when large folio in VM_LOCKED VMA range Yin Fengwei
2023-07-08 5:11 ` Yu Zhao
2023-07-08 5:33 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-08 5:56 ` Yu Zhao
2023-07-07 16:52 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] mm: mlock: update mlock_pte_range to handle large folio Yin Fengwei
2023-07-07 17:26 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2023-07-07 18:54 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] support large folio for mlock David Hildenbrand
2023-07-07 19:06 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-07-07 19:15 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-07 19:26 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-07-10 10:36 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-07-08 3:52 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-08 4:02 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-07-08 4:35 ` Yu Zhao
2023-07-08 4:40 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-08 4:36 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-09 13:25 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-10 9:32 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-10 9:43 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-10 9:57 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-10 10:19 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-08 3:34 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-08 3:31 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-08 4:45 ` Yu Zhao
2023-07-08 5:01 ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-07-08 5:06 ` Yu Zhao
2023-07-08 5:35 ` Yin, Fengwei
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=ZKhK1Ic1KCdOLRYm@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
--cc=yuzhao@google.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