linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@suse.de>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	 Luke Yang <luyang@redhat.com>,
	"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
	 Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
	 Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
	jhladky@redhat.com,  linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm/mprotect: micro-optimization work
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2026 15:14:08 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <wnfqwxdtepdpf4eq2ckrhasupated2itv3ai6zpll36seefm25@dr6m5n254ztc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bb40b9b5-d71e-4968-8c14-86af46e33fee@kernel.org>

On Wed, Apr 01, 2026 at 10:25:40AM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> On 3/30/26 22:06, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Mar 2026 15:55:51 -0400 Luke Yang <luyang@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Thanks for working on this. I just wanted to share that we've created a
> >> test kernel with your patches and tested on the following CPUs:
> >>
> >> --- aarch64 ---
> >> Ampere Altra
> >> Ampere Altra Max
> >>
> >> --- x86_64 ---
> >> AMD EPYC 7713
> >> AMD EPYC 7351
> >> AMD EPYC 7542
> >> AMD EPYC 7573X
> >> AMD EPYC 7702
> >> AMD EPYC 9754
> >> Intel Xeon Gold 6126
> >> Into Xeon Gold 6330
> >> Intel Xeon Gold 6530
> >> Intel Xeon Platinum 8351N
> >> Intel Core i7-6820HQ
> >>
> >> --- ppc64le ---
> >> IBM Power 10
> >>
> >> On average, we see improvements ranging from a minimum of 5% to a
> >> maximum of 55%, with most improvements showing around a 25% speed up in
> >> the libmicro/mprot_tw4m micro benchmark.
> > 
> > Thanks, that's nice.  I've added some of the above into the changelog
> > and I took the liberty of adding your Tested-by: to both patches.
> > 
> > fyi, regarding [2/2]: it's unclear to me whether the discussion with
> > David will result in any alterations.  If there's something I need to
> > it always helps to lmk ;)
> 
> I think we want to get a better understanding of which exact __always_inline
> is really helpful in patch #2, and where to apply the nr_ptes==1 forced
> optimization.
> 
> I updated my microbenchmark I use for fork+unmap etc to measure
> mprotect as well
> 
> 	https://gitlab.com/davidhildenbrand/scratchspace/-/raw/main/pte-mapped-folio-benchmarks.c?ref_type=heads
> 
> Running some simple tests with order-0 on 1 GiB of memory:
> 
> 
> Upstream Linus:
> 
> ./pte-mapped-folio-benchmarks 0 write-protect 5
> 0.005779
> ...
> ./pte-mapped-folio-benchmarks 0 write-unprotect 5
> 0.009113
> ...
> 
> 
> With Pedro's patch #2:
> $ ./pte-mapped-folio-benchmarks 0 write-protect 5
> 0.003941
> ...
> $ ./pte-mapped-folio-benchmarks 0 write-unprotect 5
> 0.006163
> ...
> 
> 
> With the patch below:
> 
> $ ./pte-mapped-folio-benchmarks 0 write-protect 5
> 0.003364
> 
> $ ./pte-mapped-folio-benchmarks 0 write-unprotect 5
> 0.005729

Hmm. Thanks for the testing. Interesting. I'll give it a shot. I'll have
results and/or a possible v3 by tomorrow, if need be.

Apologies for the slight delay here! :)

-- 
Pedro


  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-01 14:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-24 15:43 Pedro Falcato
2026-03-24 15:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/mprotect: move softleaf code out of the main function Pedro Falcato
2026-03-24 20:12   ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-24 15:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] mm/mprotect: special-case small folios when applying write permissions Pedro Falcato
2026-03-24 20:18   ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-25 11:37     ` Pedro Falcato
2026-03-30 15:16       ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-02  0:09         ` Andrew Morton
2026-04-02  3:44           ` Andrew Morton
2026-04-02  7:11             ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-30 19:55 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] mm/mprotect: micro-optimization work Luke Yang
2026-03-30 20:06   ` Andrew Morton
2026-04-01  8:25     ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-01 14:14       ` Pedro Falcato [this message]
2026-04-01 14:10   ` Pedro Falcato
2026-04-02 13:55     ` Luke Yang
2026-04-06 14:32       ` Luke Yang

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=wnfqwxdtepdpf4eq2ckrhasupated2itv3ai6zpll36seefm25@dr6m5n254ztc \
    --to=pfalcato@suse.de \
    --cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=jhladky@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ljs@kernel.org \
    --cc=luyang@redhat.com \
    --cc=npache@redhat.com \
    --cc=vbabka@kernel.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