Re: [PATCH mm-unstable v1] mm: add a total mapcount for large folios

[David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>]

On 10.08.23 13:14, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 09.08.23 21:17, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 09.08.23 21:07, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>>> On 09/08/2023 09:32, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>> Let's track the total mapcount for all large folios in the first subpage.
>>>>
>>>> The total mapcount is what we actually want to know in folio_mapcount()
>>>> and it is also sufficient for implementing folio_mapped(). This also
>>>> gets rid of any "raceiness" concerns as expressed in
>>>> folio_total_mapcount().
>>>>
>>>> With sub-PMD THP becoming more important and things looking promising
>>>> that we will soon get support for such anon THP, we want to avoid looping
>>>> over all pages of a folio just to calculate the total mapcount. Further,
>>>> we may soon want to use the total mapcount in other context more
>>>> frequently, so prepare for reading it efficiently and atomically.
>>>>
>>>> Make room for the total mapcount in page[1] of the folio by moving
>>>> _nr_pages_mapped to page[2] of the folio: it is not applicable to hugetlb
>>>> -- and with the total mapcount in place probably also not desirable even
>>>> if PMD-mappable hugetlb pages could get PTE-mapped at some point -- so we
>>>> can overlay the hugetlb fields.
>>>>
>>>> Note that we currently don't expect any order-1 compound pages / THP in
>>>> rmap code, and that such support is not planned. If ever desired, we could
>>>> move the compound mapcount to another page, because it only applies to
>>>> PMD-mappable folios that are definitely larger. Let's avoid consuming
>>>> more space elsewhere for now -- we might need more space for a different
>>>> purpose in some subpages soon.
>>>>
>>>> Maintain the total mapcount also for hugetlb pages. Use the total mapcount
>>>> to implement folio_mapcount(), total_mapcount(), folio_mapped() and
>>>> page_mapped().
>>>>
>>>> We can now get rid of folio_total_mapcount() and
>>>> folio_large_is_mapped(), by just inlining reading of the total mapcount.
>>>>
>>>> _nr_pages_mapped is now only used in rmap code, so not accidentially
>>>> externally where it might be used on arbitrary order-1 pages. The remaining
>>>> usage is:
>>>>
>>>> (1) Detect how to adjust stats: NR_ANON_MAPPED and NR_FILE_MAPPED
>>>>     -> If we would account the total folio as mapped when mapping a
>>>>        page (based on the total mapcount), we could remove that usage.
>>>>
>>>> (2) Detect when to add a folio to the deferred split queue
>>>>     -> If we would apply a different heuristic, or scan using the rmap on
>>>>        the memory reclaim path for partially mapped anon folios to
>>>>        split them, we could remove that usage as well.
>>>>
>>>> So maybe, we can simplify things in the future and remove
>>>> _nr_pages_mapped. For now, leave these things as they are, they need more
>>>> thought. Hugh really did a nice job implementing that precise tracking
>>>> after all.
>>>>
>>>> Note: Not adding order-1 sanity checks to the file_rmap functions for
>>>>          now. For anon pages, they are certainly not required right now.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>>>> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
>>>> Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
>>>> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
>>>> Cc: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>
>>>> Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
>>>> Cc: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>>>
>>> Other than the nits and query on zeroing _total_mapcount below, LGTM. If zeroing
>>> is correct:
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
>>
>> Thanks for the review!
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>     
>>>>     static inline int total_mapcount(struct page *page)
>>>
>>> nit: couldn't total_mapcount() just be implemented as a wrapper around
>>> folio_mapcount()? What's the benefit of PageCompound() check instead of just
>>> getting the folio and checking if it's large? i.e:
>>
>> Good point, let me take a look tomorrow if the compiler can optimize in
>> both cases equally well.
> 
> I checked by adjusting total_mapcount():
> 
> Before:
> 
>           if (PageTransHuge(page) && total_mapcount(page) > 1)
> ffffffff81411931:       4c 89 e7                mov    %r12,%rdi
> ffffffff81411934:       e8 f7 b1 ff ff          call   ffffffff8140cb30 <PageTransHuge>
> ffffffff81411939:       85 c0                   test   %eax,%eax
> ffffffff8141193b:       74 29                   je     ffffffff81411966 <migrate_misplaced_page+0x166>
> ffffffff8141193d:       49 8b 04 24             mov    (%r12),%rax
>           return test_bit(PG_head, &page->flags) ||
> ffffffff81411941:       a9 00 00 01 00          test   $0x10000,%eax
> ffffffff81411946:       0f 85 1f 01 00 00       jne    ffffffff81411a6b <migrate_misplaced_page+0x26b>
>                  READ_ONCE(page->compound_head) & 1;
> ffffffff8141194c:       49 8b 44 24 08          mov    0x8(%r12),%rax
>           return test_bit(PG_head, &page->flags) ||
> ffffffff81411951:       a8 01                   test   $0x1,%al
> ffffffff81411953:       0f 85 12 01 00 00       jne    ffffffff81411a6b <migrate_misplaced_page+0x26b>
> ffffffff81411959:       41 8b 44 24 30          mov    0x30(%r12),%eax
>                   return atomic_read(&page->_mapcount) + 1;
> ffffffff8141195e:       83 c0 01                add    $0x1,%eax
> ffffffff81411961:       83 f8 01                cmp    $0x1,%eax
> ffffffff81411964:       7f 77                   jg     ffffffff814119dd <migrate_misplaced_page+0x1dd>
> 
> So a total of 10 instructions after handling the mov/call/test/je for PageTransHuge().
> 
> After:
> 
>           if (PageTransHuge(page) && total_mapcount(page) > 1)
> ffffffff81411931:       4c 89 e7                mov    %r12,%rdi
> ffffffff81411934:       e8 f7 b1 ff ff          call   ffffffff8140cb30 <PageTransHuge>
> ffffffff81411939:       85 c0                   test   %eax,%eax
> ffffffff8141193b:       74 2f                   je     ffffffff8141196c <migrate_misplaced_page+0x16c>
>           unsigned long head = READ_ONCE(page->compound_head);
> ffffffff8141193d:       49 8b 44 24 08          mov    0x8(%r12),%rax
>           if (unlikely(head & 1))
> ffffffff81411942:       a8 01                   test   $0x1,%al
> ffffffff81411944:       0f 85 fc 05 00 00       jne    ffffffff81411f46 <migrate_misplaced_page+0x746>
> ffffffff8141194a:       0f 1f 44 00 00          nopl   0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
>                   return page;
> ffffffff8141194f:       4c 89 e0                mov    %r12,%rax
> ffffffff81411952:       48 8b 10                mov    (%rax),%rdx
>           if (likely(!folio_test_large(folio)))
> ffffffff81411955:       f7 c2 00 00 01 00       test   $0x10000,%edx
> ffffffff8141195b:       0f 85 da 05 00 00       jne    ffffffff81411f3b <migrate_misplaced_page+0x73b>
> ffffffff81411961:       8b 40 30                mov    0x30(%rax),%eax
>                   return atomic_read(&folio->_mapcount) + 1;
> ffffffff81411964:       83 c0 01                add    $0x1,%eax
> ffffffff81411967:       83 f8 01                cmp    $0x1,%eax
> ffffffff8141196a:       7f 77                   jg     ffffffff814119e3 <migrate_misplaced_page+0x1e3>
> 
> So a total of 11 (+ 1 NOP) instructions after handling the mov/call/test/je for PageTransHuge().
> 
> Essentially one more MOV instruction.
> 
> I guess nobody really cares :)
> 

Also, let's simply do:

static inline bool folio_mapped(struct folio *folio)
{
	folio_mapcount(folio) > 1;
}

So this all cleans up quite a bit.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb