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 51AB1CD11C2 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 21:23:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 95BB96B007B; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 17:23:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 90A526B0082; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 17:23:27 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 7D1FA6B0083; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 17:23:27 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BBC76B007B for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 17:23:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin25.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9CB2160960 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 21:23:26 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81994898412.25.EE48670 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by imf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4789180002 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 21:23:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=WlJ5nhqZ; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of peterx@redhat.com designates 170.10.133.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=peterx@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1712784204; 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=VoAvr6OirKnLqDVqGLt8HEe3e6i9iuTzmNSvvLDk/bk=; b=hNLXS0p+bpzWVO1ducK0iXUlvGng+VoPecxWvzmrd9M80bB1YqdLBjZYNIXpf20kdLXVEf P6wEAqEWnIPi0I5oS1nX8CDCjfVx/yYBiPcxgQ9qX8ZjzomhNFqo6ubVRy0fAqwGzaxOc4 jXVEbrcXgwkfvPwBK5Xx8aEWrCxvqN4= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1712784204; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=DHY+/O3YBnGJEQnHWZhstyX45LsOyWWjPWP9MlJfearofB9lzM35tAMJXSo0LkLbE8D8Lh NOtyuu66fYe1QDBv0nA4STTpWfl3+vEgo+BzbHvi+bw33/C8Ncz2n/DmYDencJJda3V3Zg k5Ndum1nNvO3s1oF7AlrkRBobf6uOrE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=WlJ5nhqZ; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of peterx@redhat.com designates 170.10.133.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=peterx@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1712784204; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VoAvr6OirKnLqDVqGLt8HEe3e6i9iuTzmNSvvLDk/bk=; b=WlJ5nhqZOu1m8zG+oxAOC87f9R3aHi5FbBJANKBh2WAmR14TqKO7ZfARXsy/XfX2PaAwwv jt08xZoU+kGTZL67QFElPdWs6kjFFqjoJTBPmROpCv8hBRpVL2aEpUVMRSBlNSe9HbPJmW 2552F1iVdddtHBm02Phiur5GsDGedR4= Received: from mail-qt1-f198.google.com (mail-qt1-f198.google.com [209.85.160.198]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-78-Xoubxi6zPLOXHMBRaOSGUQ-1; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 17:23:21 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Xoubxi6zPLOXHMBRaOSGUQ-1 Received: by mail-qt1-f198.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-4311d908f3cso31243231cf.1 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 14:23:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1712784201; x=1713389001; 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=VoAvr6OirKnLqDVqGLt8HEe3e6i9iuTzmNSvvLDk/bk=; b=LLCe0QTNhub5LQSxZdW29DDsXlicqIxLz02W3B4QtAlwbwPMsqiOP1lxVY87jM2Jfz QNS7on0N3Ki/YVydcyVVS0mfMcR5Avb4JkcxMVHopLnQox3gRNPYO8RhkOc/ppZsp4ia YM9hhgFTvXOtkADhBzQ6RxoDsA+gHpJLMd/ls9QPXcGbsQAyhUdYAn/byzGWgU6G7o8O xHrmv7ug4yFRjUK6IDp8Rg6eukHZUpcrTRIjMdaJghff2mN08A9IgdJgAX2tjv0BbsdE GnUuksQ1XiZo4ePylAkESX4Z0INHs4XgG1HDlkjaKw+JrYLq5LT2scza7mCrife6HBEk uNTQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVonFO2SHene0xzU29j+QWT/cRrX1JmykErPRw3FVtSnHYmM6THGqOisyz3gPtTVL5dSClGaqdgBdNKYmozgbkF8r0= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzIZbMZVc0tcKMAvqZNK2nqTwKcp+oEant0L4zi0EE54huwgad2 ruorLgtzApRpydLVUI/hwFOSX3WKWKRmi9K3CEBCgT+xM/jEpUu1OTPXt97r+PftdFJHOSu3V+u rppI3iU0HGiC/bDEBkPj9JIiDmHNK0ce0n4CKKmdVw33UPpnx X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:404:b0:699:eee:f0d5 with SMTP id z4-20020a056214040400b006990eeef0d5mr4040860qvx.1.1712784200892; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 14:23:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFFevpA3x2tyTQdi7o2oOvWy9oK9LBRvmHXFoC0vnjFqtbj3aNfUrR7kVtPCN1eKjPHrnB8rQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:404:b0:699:eee:f0d5 with SMTP id z4-20020a056214040400b006990eeef0d5mr4040837qvx.1.1712784200210; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 14:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from x1n (pool-99-254-121-117.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com. [99.254.121.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e11-20020ad4442b000000b00690fd3f6e3esm28978qvt.104.2024.04.10.14.23.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 10 Apr 2024 14:23:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 17:23:18 -0400 From: Peter Xu To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Suren Baghdasaryan , Lokesh Gidra , "Liam R . Howlett" , Alistair Popple Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Always sanity check anon_vma first for per-vma locks Message-ID: References: <20240410170621.2011171-1-peterx@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D4789180002 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam11 X-Stat-Signature: g1cxp83p9p9od6yarafummxnh7min8od X-HE-Tag: 1712784204-432185 X-HE-Meta: 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 DBTpPPL9 Y2Hqvbr4e8Rs8pRfSRWSeUPQ1vefHD157WMmf0j08NLf9iorKqC/M8T/L5FXWkYe9eLAIRLvqnEYtG6j3zTNATY52X68pTufMIOPtOVDLmrpml26rb6xDgsKnevow0n4ZuLEwFPFaPcQsJ10Rnuu+FZXp8kLrlgqP7WJ3wolIPvSveU6gR2/POIzzvkijEmHyry+OgJ7BPwQrhnHzQ5fQeI93x+nUoPQmcYyZ27kRLCYcbQGNo6wZN80Ga5G7G6o6L3xbQ2uBR9ynenko6qCTcnjp3yrm7PPwahSGXIr6iDhYzursXHo3BOH73Uqw8+mbvbcvLwQyAomlKmGZ2Lp3uLr1KpTmLZ0J/LJlJnKv+sK9udGmbIZp2/F5KLIuIMP+StjW2LYTu+LhX3Ag73d2Z6omWtWMRolRkOLE X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000114, 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 Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 10:10:45PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > I can do some tests later today or tomorrow. Any suggestion you have on > > amplifying such effect that you have concern with? > > 8 socket NUMA system, 800MB text segment, 10,000 threads. No, I'm not > joking, that's a real customer workload. Well, I believe you, but even with this, that's a total of 800MB memory on a giant moster system... probably just to fault in once. And even before we talk about that into details.. we're talking about such giant program running acorss hundreds of cores with hundreds of MB text, then... hasn't the program developer already considered mlockall() at the entry of the program? Wouldn't that greatly beneficial already with whatever granule of locks that a future fault would take? -- Peter Xu