From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com,
vbabka@suse.cz, jannh@google.com, pfalcato@suse.de,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
david@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com, ryan.roberts@arm.com,
mingo@kernel.org, libang.li@antgroup.com, maobibo@loongson.cn,
zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com, baohua@kernel.org,
anshuman.khandual@arm.com, willy@infradead.org,
ioworker0@gmail.com, yang@os.amperecomputing.com,
baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, ziy@nvidia.com, hughd@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] mm: Optimize mremap() by PTE batching
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 14:18:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <af75dbe7-b6fd-4288-8171-32fd6f09a850@lucifer.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250610035043.75448-3-dev.jain@arm.com>
On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 09:20:43AM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
> Use folio_pte_batch() to optimize move_ptes(). On arm64, if the ptes
> are painted with the contig bit, then ptep_get() will iterate through all 16
> entries to collect a/d bits. Hence this optimization will result in a 16x
> reduction in the number of ptep_get() calls. Next, ptep_get_and_clear()
> will eventually call contpte_try_unfold() on every contig block, thus
> flushing the TLB for the complete large folio range. Instead, use
> get_and_clear_full_ptes() so as to elide TLBIs on each contig block, and only
> do them on the starting and ending contig block.
>
> For split folios, there will be no pte batching; nr_ptes will be 1. For
> pagetable splitting, the ptes will still point to the same large folio;
> for arm64, this results in the optimization described above, and for other
> arches (including the general case), a minor improvement is expected due to
> a reduction in the number of function calls.
This is a fantastic improvement on commit message, thank you very much!
>
> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
Looks good to me:
Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>
> ---
> mm/mremap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c
> index 180b12225368..18b215521ada 100644
> --- a/mm/mremap.c
> +++ b/mm/mremap.c
> @@ -170,6 +170,23 @@ static pte_t move_soft_dirty_pte(pte_t pte)
> return pte;
> }
>
Just for ease of reviewing the review :P
We dropped the comment here as agreed:
> +static int mremap_folio_pte_batch(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
> + pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte, int max_nr)
> +{
> + const fpb_t flags = FPB_IGNORE_DIRTY | FPB_IGNORE_SOFT_DIRTY;
> + struct folio *folio;
> +
> + if (max_nr == 1)
> + return 1;
> +
> + folio = vm_normal_folio(vma, addr, pte);
> + if (!folio || !folio_test_large(folio))
> + return 1;
> +
> + return folio_pte_batch(folio, addr, ptep, pte, max_nr, flags, NULL,
> + NULL, NULL);
> +}
> +
> static int move_ptes(struct pagetable_move_control *pmc,
> unsigned long extent, pmd_t *old_pmd, pmd_t *new_pmd)
> {
> @@ -177,7 +194,7 @@ static int move_ptes(struct pagetable_move_control *pmc,
> bool need_clear_uffd_wp = vma_has_uffd_without_event_remap(vma);
> struct mm_struct *mm = vma->vm_mm;
> pte_t *old_ptep, *new_ptep;
> - pte_t pte;
> + pte_t old_pte, pte;
> pmd_t dummy_pmdval;
> spinlock_t *old_ptl, *new_ptl;
> bool force_flush = false;
> @@ -185,6 +202,8 @@ static int move_ptes(struct pagetable_move_control *pmc,
> unsigned long new_addr = pmc->new_addr;
> unsigned long old_end = old_addr + extent;
> unsigned long len = old_end - old_addr;
> + int max_nr_ptes;
> + int nr_ptes;
> int err = 0;
>
> /*
> @@ -236,14 +255,16 @@ static int move_ptes(struct pagetable_move_control *pmc,
> flush_tlb_batched_pending(vma->vm_mm);
> arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode();
>
> - for (; old_addr < old_end; old_ptep++, old_addr += PAGE_SIZE,
> - new_ptep++, new_addr += PAGE_SIZE) {
> + for (; old_addr < old_end; old_ptep += nr_ptes, old_addr += nr_ptes * PAGE_SIZE,
> + new_ptep += nr_ptes, new_addr += nr_ptes * PAGE_SIZE) {
> VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!pte_none(*new_ptep));
We added this, which does in fact seem sane. We absolutely should not expect to
see a new PTE here.
The uprobe logic recently addressed actually made it possible for something to
be there (ugh god) but that's now fixed.
>
> - if (pte_none(ptep_get(old_ptep)))
> + nr_ptes = 1;
> + max_nr_ptes = (old_end - old_addr) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> + old_pte = ptep_get(old_ptep);
> + if (pte_none(old_pte))
> continue;
>
> - pte = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, old_addr, old_ptep);
> /*
> * If we are remapping a valid PTE, make sure
> * to flush TLB before we drop the PTL for the
> @@ -255,8 +276,12 @@ static int move_ptes(struct pagetable_move_control *pmc,
> * the TLB entry for the old mapping has been
> * flushed.
> */
> - if (pte_present(pte))
> + if (pte_present(old_pte)) {
> + nr_ptes = mremap_folio_pte_batch(vma, old_addr, old_ptep,
> + old_pte, max_nr_ptes);
> force_flush = true;
> + }
> + pte = get_and_clear_full_ptes(mm, old_addr, old_ptep, nr_ptes, 0);
> pte = move_pte(pte, old_addr, new_addr);
> pte = move_soft_dirty_pte(pte);
>
> @@ -269,7 +294,7 @@ static int move_ptes(struct pagetable_move_control *pmc,
> else if (is_swap_pte(pte))
> pte = pte_swp_clear_uffd_wp(pte);
> }
> - set_pte_at(mm, new_addr, new_ptep, pte);
> + set_ptes(mm, new_addr, new_ptep, pte, nr_ptes);
> }
> }
>
> --
> 2.30.2
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-10 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-10 3:50 [PATCH v4 0/2] Optimize mremap() for large folios Dev Jain
2025-06-10 3:50 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] mm: Call pointers to ptes as ptep Dev Jain
2025-06-11 13:23 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-11 13:25 ` Dev Jain
2025-06-11 13:29 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-11 13:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-12 12:05 ` Pedro Falcato
2025-06-10 3:50 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] mm: Optimize mremap() by PTE batching Dev Jain
2025-06-10 7:03 ` Barry Song
2025-06-10 7:44 ` Dev Jain
2025-06-10 8:11 ` Barry Song
2025-06-16 21:27 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-10 8:37 ` Barry Song
2025-06-10 13:18 ` Lorenzo Stoakes [this message]
2025-06-11 14:00 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-13 4:24 ` Dev Jain
2025-06-17 8:02 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-13 12:32 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-16 16:13 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-12 12:13 ` Pedro Falcato
2025-10-27 21:40 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-10-28 5:32 ` Dev Jain
2025-10-28 7:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-10 12:11 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] Optimize mremap() for large folios Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-10 12:33 ` Dev Jain
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=af75dbe7-b6fd-4288-8171-32fd6f09a850@lucifer.local \
--to=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=libang.li@antgroup.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=maobibo@loongson.cn \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=pfalcato@suse.de \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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