From: Haoran Zhu <zhr1502@sjtu.edu.cn>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: [Question] mmap_miss not increasing in mmap random reads
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2025 14:05:11 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aD6Ql3KA6u9B58lg@nixos.> (raw)
Hi all,
While examining mm/filemap.c, I noticed that file->f_ra.mmap_miss does not increase as expected under mmap-based random read workloads, which prevents readahead from being disabled—even when it's clearly ineffective.
Test case: 4GB file mmap'd and randomly accessed in a KVM guest with 2GB RAM. See benchmark code attached at the end. I used the following bpftrace to monitor readahead activity:
kfunc:vmlinux:do_page_cache_ra {
printf("size: %d start: %d mmap_miss: %d from %s\n",
args->ractl->file->f_ra.size,
args->ractl->file->f_ra.start,
args->ractl->file->f_ra.mmap_miss,
comm);
}
The result is that mmap_miss remains low, and readahead remains enabled. From filemap_map_pages(), this appears to be due to the logic in mm/filemap.c:filemap_map_pages that treats the surrounding folios of a faulted-in page as asynchronous hits and subtracts them from mmap_miss:
mmap_miss_saved = READ_ONCE(file->f_ra.mmap_miss);
if (mmap_miss >= mmap_miss_saved)
WRITE_ONCE(file->f_ra.mmap_miss, 0);
else
WRITE_ONCE(file->f_ra.mmap_miss, mmap_miss_saved - mmap_miss);
This suppresses mmap_miss growth even when faults are clearly synchronous. I commented out the above block, re-run the test and saw the benchmark time drop from ~6200 ms to ~1500 ms, indicating that readahead was being wrongly retained.
Jan Kara previously mentioned a similar issue in [1]:
> I see, OK. But that's a (longstanding) bug in how mmap_miss is handled. Can
> you please test whether attached patches fix the trashing for you? At least
> now I can see mmap_miss properly increments when we are hitting uncached
> pages...
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240201173130.frpaqpy7iyzias5j@quack3/
So my questions are:
1. Is this mmap_miss suppression intentional?
2. Was the design intended to avoid false positives for disabling readahead?
3. Would it make sense to reclassify the "asynchronous hits" in filemap_map_pages() to exclude those resulting directly from the current fault?
Benchmark below.
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <time.h>
#include <string.h>
#define PAGE_SIZE 4096
void clear_page_cache() {
sync();
int fd = open("/proc/sys/vm/drop_caches", O_WRONLY);
if (fd == -1) {
perror("open");
return;
}
if (write(fd, "3\n", 2) == -1) {
perror("write");
}
close(fd);
}
void rand_read(const char *memblock, uint64_t size, uint64_t nr) {
for (uint64_t i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
uint64_t pos = ((uint64_t)rand()) * rand() % size;
if (memblock[pos] == '7') printf("Magic number!\n");
}
}
long long get_time_ms() {
struct timespec ts;
clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &ts);
return (long long)ts.tv_sec * 1000 + ts.tv_nsec / 1000000;
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
if (argc < 2) {
fprintf(stderr, "Usage: %s <filename> [num_accesses]\n", argv[0]);
return 1;
}
int fd = open(argv[1], O_RDONLY);
if (fd == -1) {
perror("open file");
return 1;
}
struct stat sb;
fstat(fd, &sb);
const char *memblock = mmap(NULL, sb.st_size, PROT_READ, MAP_PRIVATE, fd, 0);
if (memblock == MAP_FAILED) {
perror("mmap");
return 1;
}
uint64_t nr_access = (argc > 2) ? strtoull(argv[2], NULL, 10) : (512 * 1024);
clear_page_cache();
long long start = get_time_ms();
rand_read(memblock, sb.st_size, nr_access);
long long end = get_time_ms();
printf("Rand Read Time: %lldms\n", end - start);
return 0;
}
Reproduction steps:
1. save the above code as randread.c
2. # gcc -O2 -o randread randread.c
3. # fallocate -l 4G testfile
4. # ./randread testfile 524288
5. Example output:
Rand Read Time: 1400ms
Thanks,
Haoran Zhu
reply other threads:[~2025-06-03 6:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=aD6Ql3KA6u9B58lg@nixos. \
--to=zhr1502@sjtu.edu.cn \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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