All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
To: John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remap_file_pages needs to check for cache coherency
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 14:33:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131227193330.GE4945@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BLU0-SMTP17D26551261DF285A7E6F497CD0@phx.gbl>

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 02:13:16PM -0500, John David Anglin wrote:
> On 27-Dec-13, at 1:00 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> 
> >+#ifdef __ARCH_FORCE_SHMLBA
> >+	/* Is the mapping cache-coherent? */
> >+	if ((pgoff ^ linear_page_index(vma, start)) &
> >+	    ((SHMLBA-1) >> PAGE_SHIFT))
> >+		goto out;
> >+#endif
> 
> 
> I think this will cause problems on PA-RISC.  The reason is we have
> an additional offset
> for mappings.  See get_offset() in sys_parisc.c.

I don't think it will cause any additional problems.  The test merely
asks "Is the offset to put at this address cache-coherent with the offset
that was at this address when the mmap was established?"

> SHMLBA is 4 MB on PA-RISC.  If we limit ourselves to aligned
> mappings, we run out of
> memory very quickly.  Even with our current implementation, we fail
> the perl locales test
> with locales-all installed.

I know the large SHMLBA is problematic for PA-RISC, but I don't think
there's a lot of code out there using remap_file_pages().  code.google.com
found almost nothing, and a regular google search found only a couple
of little toys.

Have you considered measuring SHMLBA on different CPU models and
reducing it at boot time?  I know that 4MB is the architectural guarantee
(actually, I seem to remember that 16MB was the architectural guarantee,
but jsm found some CPU architects who said it would enver exceed 4MB).
I bet some CPUs have considerably lower cache coherency limits.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
To: John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remap_file_pages needs to check for cache coherency
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 19:33:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131227193330.GE4945@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BLU0-SMTP17D26551261DF285A7E6F497CD0@phx.gbl>

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 02:13:16PM -0500, John David Anglin wrote:
> On 27-Dec-13, at 1:00 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> 
> >+#ifdef __ARCH_FORCE_SHMLBA
> >+	/* Is the mapping cache-coherent? */
> >+	if ((pgoff ^ linear_page_index(vma, start)) &
> >+	    ((SHMLBA-1) >> PAGE_SHIFT))
> >+		goto out;
> >+#endif
> 
> 
> I think this will cause problems on PA-RISC.  The reason is we have
> an additional offset
> for mappings.  See get_offset() in sys_parisc.c.

I don't think it will cause any additional problems.  The test merely
asks "Is the offset to put at this address cache-coherent with the offset
that was at this address when the mmap was established?"

> SHMLBA is 4 MB on PA-RISC.  If we limit ourselves to aligned
> mappings, we run out of
> memory very quickly.  Even with our current implementation, we fail
> the perl locales test
> with locales-all installed.

I know the large SHMLBA is problematic for PA-RISC, but I don't think
there's a lot of code out there using remap_file_pages().  code.google.com
found almost nothing, and a regular google search found only a couple
of little toys.

Have you considered measuring SHMLBA on different CPU models and
reducing it at boot time?  I know that 4MB is the architectural guarantee
(actually, I seem to remember that 16MB was the architectural guarantee,
but jsm found some CPU architects who said it would enver exceed 4MB).
I bet some CPUs have considerably lower cache coherency limits.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
To: John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remap_file_pages needs to check for cache coherency
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 14:33:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131227193330.GE4945@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BLU0-SMTP17D26551261DF285A7E6F497CD0@phx.gbl>

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 02:13:16PM -0500, John David Anglin wrote:
> On 27-Dec-13, at 1:00 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> 
> >+#ifdef __ARCH_FORCE_SHMLBA
> >+	/* Is the mapping cache-coherent? */
> >+	if ((pgoff ^ linear_page_index(vma, start)) &
> >+	    ((SHMLBA-1) >> PAGE_SHIFT))
> >+		goto out;
> >+#endif
> 
> 
> I think this will cause problems on PA-RISC.  The reason is we have
> an additional offset
> for mappings.  See get_offset() in sys_parisc.c.

I don't think it will cause any additional problems.  The test merely
asks "Is the offset to put at this address cache-coherent with the offset
that was at this address when the mmap was established?"

> SHMLBA is 4 MB on PA-RISC.  If we limit ourselves to aligned
> mappings, we run out of
> memory very quickly.  Even with our current implementation, we fail
> the perl locales test
> with locales-all installed.

I know the large SHMLBA is problematic for PA-RISC, but I don't think
there's a lot of code out there using remap_file_pages().  code.google.com
found almost nothing, and a regular google search found only a couple
of little toys.

Have you considered measuring SHMLBA on different CPU models and
reducing it at boot time?  I know that 4MB is the architectural guarantee
(actually, I seem to remember that 16MB was the architectural guarantee,
but jsm found some CPU architects who said it would enver exceed 4MB).
I bet some CPUs have considerably lower cache coherency limits.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2013-12-27 19:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-27 18:00 [PATCH] remap_file_pages needs to check for cache coherency Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-27 18:00 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-27 18:00 ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-27 18:48 ` David Miller
2013-12-27 18:48   ` David Miller
2013-12-27 18:48   ` David Miller
2013-12-27 19:20   ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-27 19:20     ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-27 19:20     ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-27 19:13 ` John David Anglin
2013-12-27 19:13   ` John David Anglin
2013-12-27 19:13   ` John David Anglin
2013-12-27 19:33   ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2013-12-27 19:33     ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-27 19:33     ` Matthew Wilcox
2013-12-27 19:47     ` John David Anglin
2013-12-27 19:47       ` John David Anglin
2013-12-27 19:47       ` John David Anglin
2013-12-27 20:14       ` John David Anglin
2013-12-27 20:14         ` John David Anglin
2013-12-27 20:14         ` John David Anglin

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=20131227193330.GE4945@linux.intel.com \
    --to=willy@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dave.anglin@bell.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.