From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, willy@infradead.org,
kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com
Cc: ryan.roberts@arm.com, anshuman.khandual@arm.com,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, cl@gentwo.org, vbabka@suse.cz,
mhocko@suse.com, apopple@nvidia.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
will@kernel.org, baohua@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz,
mark.rutland@arm.com, hughd@google.com, aneesh.kumar@kernel.org,
yang@os.amperecomputing.com, peterx@redhat.com,
ioworker0@gmail.com, jglisse@google.com,
wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com, ziy@nvidia.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm: Abstract THP allocation
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 11:27:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f610e933-278e-4f95-a363-8f023a5e7aa9@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240911065600.1002644-2-dev.jain@arm.com>
On 11.09.24 08:55, Dev Jain wrote:
> In preparation for the second patch, abstract away the THP allocation
> logic present in the create_huge_pmd() path, which corresponds to the
> faulting case when no page is present.
>
> There should be no functional change as a result of applying
> this patch.
>
Hi,
> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
> ---
> mm/huge_memory.c | 110 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
> index 67c86a5d64a6..b96a1ff2bf40 100644
> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
> @@ -943,47 +943,88 @@ unsigned long thp_get_unmapped_area(struct file *filp, unsigned long addr,
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(thp_get_unmapped_area);
>
> -static vm_fault_t __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf,
> - struct page *page, gfp_t gfp)
> +static struct folio *pmd_thp_fault_alloc(gfp_t gfp, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> + unsigned long haddr, unsigned long addr)
I suggest calling this something like "vma_alloc_anon_folio_pmd()"? Then
it's more consistent with vma_alloc_folio().
Also, likely we should just only pass in "addr" and calculate "haddr"
ourselves, it's cheap and reduces the number of function parameters.
> {
> - struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
> - struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
> - pgtable_t pgtable;
> - unsigned long haddr = vmf->address & HPAGE_PMD_MASK;
> - vm_fault_t ret = 0;
> + const int order = HPAGE_PMD_ORDER;
> + struct folio *folio = vma_alloc_folio(gfp, order, vma, haddr, true);
>
> - VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_large(folio), folio);
> + if (unlikely(!folio)) {
> + count_vm_event(THP_FAULT_FALLBACK);
> + count_mthp_stat(order, MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_FALLBACK);
> + goto out;
> + }
>
> + VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_large(folio), folio);
> if (mem_cgroup_charge(folio, vma->vm_mm, gfp)) {
> folio_put(folio);
> count_vm_event(THP_FAULT_FALLBACK);
> count_vm_event(THP_FAULT_FALLBACK_CHARGE);
> - count_mthp_stat(HPAGE_PMD_ORDER, MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_FALLBACK);
> - count_mthp_stat(HPAGE_PMD_ORDER, MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_FALLBACK_CHARGE);
> - return VM_FAULT_FALLBACK;
> + count_mthp_stat(order, MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_FALLBACK);
> + count_mthp_stat(order, MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_FALLBACK_CHARGE);
> + goto out;
> }
> folio_throttle_swaprate(folio, gfp);
>
> - pgtable = pte_alloc_one(vma->vm_mm);
> - if (unlikely(!pgtable)) {
> - ret = VM_FAULT_OOM;
> - goto release;
> - }
> -
> - folio_zero_user(folio, vmf->address);
> + folio_zero_user(folio, addr);
> /*
> * The memory barrier inside __folio_mark_uptodate makes sure that
> * folio_zero_user writes become visible before the set_pmd_at()
> * write.
> */
> __folio_mark_uptodate(folio);
> +out:
> + return folio;
> +}
> +
> +static void __pmd_thp_fault_success_stats(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> +{
> + count_vm_event(THP_FAULT_ALLOC);
> + count_mthp_stat(HPAGE_PMD_ORDER, MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_ALLOC);
> + count_memcg_event_mm(vma->vm_mm, THP_FAULT_ALLOC);
> +}
Why isn't that moved into map_pmd_thp()
Note that in this patch you do:
map_pmd_thp(folio, vmf, vma, haddr);
spin_unlock(vmf->ptl);
__pmd_thp_fault_success_stats(vma);
But in patch #2
map_pmd_thp(folio, vmf, vma, haddr);
__pmd_thp_fault_success_stats(vma);
goto unlock;
release:
folio_put(folio);
unlock:
spin_unlock(vmf->ptl);
Please make that consistent, meaning:
1) Inline __pmd_thp_fault_success_stats() into map_pmd_thp(). No need to
have the separated out.
2) Either do the PTL unlocking in __pmd_thp_fault_success_stats() or in
the caller. In the caller is likely easiest. Adjusting the counters
should be cheap, if not we could revisit this later with real data.
> +
> +static void map_pmd_thp(struct folio *folio, struct vm_fault *vmf,
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long haddr)
> +{
> + pmd_t entry;
> +
> + entry = mk_huge_pmd(&folio->page, vma->vm_page_prot);
> + entry = maybe_pmd_mkwrite(pmd_mkdirty(entry), vma);
> + folio_add_new_anon_rmap(folio, vma, haddr, RMAP_EXCLUSIVE);
> + folio_add_lru_vma(folio, vma);
> + set_pmd_at(vma->vm_mm, haddr, vmf->pmd, entry);
> + update_mmu_cache_pmd(vma, vmf->address, vmf->pmd);
It's quite weird to see a mixture of haddr and vmf->address, and likely
this mixture is wrong or not not required.
Looking at arc's update_mmu_cache_pmd() implementation, I cannot see how
passing in the unaligned address would do the right thing. But maybe arc
also doesn't trigger that code path ... who knows :)
Staring at some other update_mmu_cache_pmd() users, it's quite
inconsistent. Primarily only do_huge_pmd_numa_page() and
__do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page() use the unaligned address. The others
seem to use the aligned address ... as one would expect when modifying a
PMD.
I suggest to change this function to *not* pass in the vmf, and rename
it to something like:
static void folio_map_anon_pmd(struct folio *folio, struct
vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long haddr)
Then use haddr also to do the update_mmu_cache_pmd().
> + add_mm_counter(vma->vm_mm, MM_ANONPAGES, HPAGE_PMD_NR);
> + mm_inc_nr_ptes(vma->vm_mm);
> +}
> +
> +static vm_fault_t __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> +{
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
> + struct folio *folio;
> + pgtable_t pgtable;
> + unsigned long haddr = vmf->address & HPAGE_PMD_MASK;
> + vm_fault_t ret = 0;
> + gfp_t gfp = vma_thp_gfp_mask(vma);
Nit: While at it, try to use reverse christmas-tree where possible,
makes things more reasible. You could make haddr const.
struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
unsigned long haddr = vmf->address & HPAGE_PMD_MASK;
gfp_t gfp = vma_thp_gfp_mask(vma);
struct folio *folio;
vm_fault_t ret = 0;
...
> +
> + folio = pmd_thp_fault_alloc(gfp, vma, haddr, vmf->address);
> + if (unlikely(!folio)) {
> + ret = VM_FAULT_FALLBACK;
> + goto release;
> + }
> +
> + pgtable = pte_alloc_one(vma->vm_mm);
> + if (unlikely(!pgtable)) {
> + ret = VM_FAULT_OOM;
> + goto release;
> + }
>
> vmf->ptl = pmd_lock(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd);
> +
Nit Unrelated change.
> if (unlikely(!pmd_none(*vmf->pmd))) {
> goto unlock_release;
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-11 9:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-11 6:55 [PATCH v3 0/2] Do not shatter hugezeropage on wp-fault Dev Jain
2024-09-11 6:55 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] mm: Abstract THP allocation Dev Jain
2024-09-11 9:27 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2024-09-11 9:29 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-09-11 12:02 ` Dev Jain
2024-09-11 12:00 ` Dev Jain
2024-09-11 12:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-09-11 12:55 ` Dev Jain
2024-09-11 12:53 ` Dev Jain
2024-09-11 13:00 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-09-11 13:05 ` Dev Jain
2024-09-11 13:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-09-11 13:16 ` Dev Jain
2024-09-11 10:52 ` Kefeng Wang
2024-09-11 12:22 ` Dev Jain
2024-09-12 13:26 ` kernel test robot
2024-09-11 6:56 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] mm: Allocate THP on hugezeropage wp-fault Dev Jain
2024-09-11 9:36 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-09-11 12:10 ` Dev Jain
2024-09-11 12:36 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-09-12 15:44 ` kernel test robot
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=f610e933-278e-4f95-a363-8f023a5e7aa9@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jglisse@google.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.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