linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	<catalin.marinas@arm.com>, <will@kernel.org>
Cc: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>,
	<yuzhao@google.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: mm: drop tlb flush operation when clearing the access bit
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 21:48:42 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e0b65883-18fa-40c8-a61a-bebcfee109a4@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ae3115778a3fa10ec77152e18beed54fafe0f6e7.1698151516.git.baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>



On 2023/10/24 20:56, Baolin Wang wrote:
> Now ptep_clear_flush_young() is only called by folio_referenced() to
> check if the folio was referenced, and now it will call a tlb flush on
> ARM64 architecture. However the tlb flush can be expensive on ARM64
> servers, especially for the systems with a large CPU numbers.
> 
> Similar to the x86 architecture, below comments also apply equally to
> ARM64 architecture. So we can drop the tlb flush operation in
> ptep_clear_flush_young() on ARM64 architecture to improve the performance.
> "
> /* Clearing the accessed bit without a TLB flush
>   * doesn't cause data corruption. [ It could cause incorrect
>   * page aging and the (mistaken) reclaim of hot pages, but the
>   * chance of that should be relatively low. ]
>   *
>   * So as a performance optimization don't flush the TLB when
>   * clearing the accessed bit, it will eventually be flushed by
>   * a context switch or a VM operation anyway. [ In the rare
>   * event of it not getting flushed for a long time the delay
>   * shouldn't really matter because there's no real memory
>   * pressure for swapout to react to. ]
>   */
> "
> Running the thpscale to show some obvious improvements for compaction
> latency with this patch:
>                               base                   patched
> Amean     fault-both-1      1093.19 (   0.00%)     1084.57 *   0.79%*
> Amean     fault-both-3      2566.22 (   0.00%)     2228.45 *  13.16%*
> Amean     fault-both-5      3591.22 (   0.00%)     3146.73 *  12.38%*
> Amean     fault-both-7      4157.26 (   0.00%)     4113.67 *   1.05%*
> Amean     fault-both-12     6184.79 (   0.00%)     5218.70 *  15.62%*
> Amean     fault-both-18     9103.70 (   0.00%)     7739.71 *  14.98%*
> Amean     fault-both-24    12341.73 (   0.00%)    10684.23 *  13.43%*
> Amean     fault-both-30    15519.00 (   0.00%)    13695.14 *  11.75%*
> Amean     fault-both-32    16189.15 (   0.00%)    14365.73 *  11.26%*
>                         base       patched
> Duration User         167.78      161.03
> Duration System      1836.66     1673.01
> Duration Elapsed     2074.58     2059.75
> 
> Barry Song submitted a similar patch [1] before, that replaces the
> ptep_clear_flush_young_notify() with ptep_clear_young_notify() in
> folio_referenced_one(). However, I'm not sure if removing the tlb flush
> operation is applicable to every architecture in kernel, so dropping
> the tlb flush for ARM64 seems a sensible change.

At least x86/s390/riscv/powerpc already do it, also I think we could
change pmdp_clear_flush_young_notify() too, since it is same with
ptep_clear_flush_young_notify(),

> 
> Note: I am okay for both approach, if someone can help to ensure that
> all architectures do not need the tlb flush when clearing the accessed
> bit, then I also think Barry's patch is better (hope Barry can resend
> his patch).
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220617070555.344368-1-21cnbao@gmail.com/
> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 31 ++++++++++++++++---------------
>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> index 0bd18de9fd97..2979d796ba9d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
> @@ -905,21 +905,22 @@ static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>   static inline int ptep_clear_flush_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>   					 unsigned long address, pte_t *ptep)
>   {
> -	int young = ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, address, ptep);
> -
> -	if (young) {
> -		/*
> -		 * We can elide the trailing DSB here since the worst that can
> -		 * happen is that a CPU continues to use the young entry in its
> -		 * TLB and we mistakenly reclaim the associated page. The
> -		 * window for such an event is bounded by the next
> -		 * context-switch, which provides a DSB to complete the TLB
> -		 * invalidation.
> -		 */
> -		flush_tlb_page_nosync(vma, address);
> -	}
> -
> -	return young;
> +	/*
> +	 * This comment is borrowed from x86, but applies equally to ARM64:
> +	 *
> +	 * Clearing the accessed bit without a TLB flush doesn't cause
> +	 * data corruption. [ It could cause incorrect page aging and
> +	 * the (mistaken) reclaim of hot pages, but the chance of that
> +	 * should be relatively low. ]
> +	 *
> +	 * So as a performance optimization don't flush the TLB when
> +	 * clearing the accessed bit, it will eventually be flushed by
> +	 * a context switch or a VM operation anyway. [ In the rare
> +	 * event of it not getting flushed for a long time the delay
> +	 * shouldn't really matter because there's no real memory
> +	 * pressure for swapout to react to. ]
> +	 */
> +	return ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, address, ptep);
>   }
>   
>   #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE


  reply	other threads:[~2023-10-24 13:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-24 12:56 Baolin Wang
2023-10-24 13:48 ` Kefeng Wang [this message]
2023-10-25  1:44   ` Baolin Wang
2023-10-24 22:32 ` Yu Zhao
2023-10-24 23:16 ` Barry Song
2023-10-24 23:31   ` Barry Song
2023-10-25  1:07     ` Alistair Popple
2023-10-25  1:44       ` Barry Song
2023-10-25  1:58         ` Alistair Popple
2023-10-25  2:43           ` Baolin Wang
2023-10-25  3:09             ` Alistair Popple
2023-10-25  6:17               ` Yu Zhao
2023-10-25  6:27                 ` Barry Song
2023-10-25 10:12                   ` Alistair Popple
2023-10-25 18:22                     ` Yu Zhao
2023-10-25 23:32                       ` Alistair Popple
2023-10-26 23:48                     ` Barry Song
2023-10-25  2:02     ` Baolin Wang
2023-10-25  1:39   ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-10-25  3:03     ` Baolin Wang
2023-10-25  3:08       ` Yin, Fengwei
2023-10-25  3:15         ` Baolin Wang
2023-10-25  4:34         ` Barry Song
2023-11-07 10:12     ` Will Deacon
2023-11-07 20:50       ` Barry Song
2023-10-26  4:55 ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-10-26  5:54   ` Barry Song
2023-10-26  6:01     ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-10-26 12:30       ` Robin Murphy
2023-10-26 12:32       ` Baolin Wang

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=e0b65883-18fa-40c8-a61a-bebcfee109a4@huawei.com \
    --to=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=v-songbaohua@oppo.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --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