All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>,
	Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Use the right pte val for compare in hugetlb_cow
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:33:41 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161018113341.e032f26c052dd63a8dca1f09@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161018154245.18023-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:12:45 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> We cannot use the pte value used in set_pte_at for pte_same comparison,
> because archs like ppc64, filter/add new pte flag in set_pte_at. Instead
> fetch the pte value inside hugetlb_cow. We are comparing pte value to
> make sure the pte didn't change since we dropped the page table lock.
> hugetlb_cow get called with page table lock held, and we can take a copy
> of the pte value before we drop the page table lock.
> 
> With hugetlbfs, we optimize the MAP_PRIVATE write fault path with no
> previous mapping (huge_pte_none entries), by forcing a cow in the fault
> path. This avoid take an addition fault to covert a read-only mapping
> to read/write. Here we were comparing a recently instantiated pte (via
> set_pte_at) to the pte values from linux page table. As explained above
> on ppc64 such pte_same check returned wrong result, resulting in us
> taking an additional fault on ppc64.

>From my reading this is a minor performance improvement and a -stable
backport isn't needed.  But it is unclear whether the impact warrants a
4.9 merge.

Please be careful about describing end-user visible impacts when fixing
bugs, thanks.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>,
	Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Use the right pte val for compare in hugetlb_cow
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:33:41 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161018113341.e032f26c052dd63a8dca1f09@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161018154245.18023-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:12:45 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> We cannot use the pte value used in set_pte_at for pte_same comparison,
> because archs like ppc64, filter/add new pte flag in set_pte_at. Instead
> fetch the pte value inside hugetlb_cow. We are comparing pte value to
> make sure the pte didn't change since we dropped the page table lock.
> hugetlb_cow get called with page table lock held, and we can take a copy
> of the pte value before we drop the page table lock.
> 
> With hugetlbfs, we optimize the MAP_PRIVATE write fault path with no
> previous mapping (huge_pte_none entries), by forcing a cow in the fault
> path. This avoid take an addition fault to covert a read-only mapping
> to read/write. Here we were comparing a recently instantiated pte (via
> set_pte_at) to the pte values from linux page table. As explained above
> on ppc64 such pte_same check returned wrong result, resulting in us
> taking an additional fault on ppc64.

>From my reading this is a minor performance improvement and a -stable
backport isn't needed.  But it is unclear whether the impact warrants a
4.9 merge.

Please be careful about describing end-user visible impacts when fixing
bugs, thanks.

--
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:[~2016-10-18 18:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-18 15:42 [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Use the right pte val for compare in hugetlb_cow Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-10-18 15:42 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-10-18 18:33 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2016-10-18 18:33   ` Andrew Morton
2016-10-19  5:11   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-10-19  5:11     ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-10-19  3:22 ` Hillf Danton
2016-10-19  3:22   ` Hillf Danton

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=20161018113341.e032f26c052dd63a8dca1f09@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=jstancek@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.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 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.