From: Byungchul Park <byungchul@sk.com>
To: Vinay Banakar <vny@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, willy@infradead.org, mgorman@suse.de,
Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>, Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
kernel_team@skhynix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Optimize TLB flushes during page reclaim
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 10:43:59 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250121014359.GA60549@system.software.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALf+9Yc3WjbG89uRWiDC_qYshJ5z_9WCrbEJe42Vbv+gJjs26g@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 04:47:29PM -0600, Vinay Banakar wrote:
> The current implementation in shrink_folio_list() performs full TLB
> flushes and issues IPIs for each individual page being reclaimed. This
> causes unnecessary overhead during memory reclaim, whether triggered
> by madvise(MADV_PAGEOUT) or kswapd, especially in scenarios where
> applications are actively moving cold pages to swap while maintaining
> high performance requirements for hot pages.
>
> The current code:
> 1. Clears PTE and unmaps each page individually
> 2. Performs a full TLB flush on all cores using the VMA (via CR3 write) or
> issues individual TLB shootdowns (invlpg+invlpcid) for single-core usage
> 3. Submits each page individually to BIO
>
> This approach results in:
> - Excessive full TLB flushes across all cores
> - Unnecessary IPI storms when processing multiple pages
> - Suboptimal I/O submission patterns
>
> I initially tried using selective TLB shootdowns (invlpg) instead of
> full TLB flushes per each page to avoid interference with other
> threads. However, this approach still required sending IPIs to all
> cores for each page, which did not significantly improve application
> throughput.
>
> This patch instead optimizes the process by batching operations,
> issuing one IPI per PMD instead of per page. This reduces interrupts
> by a factor of 512 and enables batching page submissions to BIO. The
> new approach:
> 1. Collect dirty pages that need to be written back
> 2. Issue a single TLB flush for all dirty pages in the batch
> 3. Process the collected pages for writebacks (submit to BIO)
The *interesting* IPIs will be reduced by 1/512 at most. Can we see the
improvement number?
Byungchul
> Testing shows significant reduction in application throughput impact
> during page-out operations. Applications maintain better performance
> during memory reclaim, when triggered by explicit
> madvise(MADV_PAGEOUT) calls.
>
> I'd appreciate your feedback on this approach, especially on the
> correctness of batched BIO submissions. Looking forward to your
> comments.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vinay Banakar <vny@google.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 107
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index bd489c1af..1bd510622 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1035,6 +1035,7 @@ static unsigned int shrink_folio_list(struct
> list_head *folio_list,
> struct folio_batch free_folios;
> LIST_HEAD(ret_folios);
> LIST_HEAD(demote_folios);
> + LIST_HEAD(pageout_list);
> unsigned int nr_reclaimed = 0;
> unsigned int pgactivate = 0;
> bool do_demote_pass;
> @@ -1351,39 +1352,9 @@ static unsigned int shrink_folio_list(struct
> list_head *folio_list,
> if (!sc->may_writepage)
> goto keep_locked;
>
> - /*
> - * Folio is dirty. Flush the TLB if a writable entry
> - * potentially exists to avoid CPU writes after I/O
> - * starts and then write it out here.
> - */
> - try_to_unmap_flush_dirty();
> - switch (pageout(folio, mapping, &plug)) {
> - case PAGE_KEEP:
> - goto keep_locked;
> - case PAGE_ACTIVATE:
> - goto activate_locked;
> - case PAGE_SUCCESS:
> - stat->nr_pageout += nr_pages;
> -
> - if (folio_test_writeback(folio))
> - goto keep;
> - if (folio_test_dirty(folio))
> - goto keep;
> -
> - /*
> - * A synchronous write - probably a ramdisk. Go
> - * ahead and try to reclaim the folio.
> - */
> - if (!folio_trylock(folio))
> - goto keep;
> - if (folio_test_dirty(folio) ||
> - folio_test_writeback(folio))
> - goto keep_locked;
> - mapping = folio_mapping(folio);
> - fallthrough;
> - case PAGE_CLEAN:
> - ; /* try to free the folio below */
> - }
> + /* Add to pageout list for defered bio submissions */
> + list_add(&folio->lru, &pageout_list);
> + continue;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -1494,6 +1465,76 @@ static unsigned int shrink_folio_list(struct
> list_head *folio_list,
> }
> /* 'folio_list' is always empty here */
>
> + if (!list_empty(&pageout_list)) {
> + /*
> + * Batch TLB flushes by flushing once before processing all dirty pages.
> + * Since we operate on one PMD at a time, this batches TLB flushes at
> + * PMD granularity rather than per-page, reducing IPIs.
> + */
> + struct address_space *mapping;
> + try_to_unmap_flush_dirty();
> +
> + while (!list_empty(&pageout_list)) {
> + struct folio *folio = lru_to_folio(&pageout_list);
> + list_del(&folio->lru);
> +
> + /* Recheck if page got reactivated */
> + if (folio_test_active(folio) ||
> + (folio_mapped(folio) && folio_test_young(folio)))
> + goto skip_pageout_locked;
> +
> + mapping = folio_mapping(folio);
> + pageout_t pageout_res = pageout(folio, mapping, &plug);
> + switch (pageout_res) {
> + case PAGE_KEEP:
> + goto skip_pageout_locked;
> + case PAGE_ACTIVATE:
> + goto skip_pageout_locked;
> + case PAGE_SUCCESS:
> + stat->nr_pageout += folio_nr_pages(folio);
> +
> + if (folio_test_writeback(folio) ||
> + folio_test_dirty(folio))
> + goto skip_pageout;
> +
> + /*
> + * A synchronous write - probably a ramdisk. Go
> + * ahead and try to reclaim the folio.
> + */
> + if (!folio_trylock(folio))
> + goto skip_pageout;
> + if (folio_test_dirty(folio) ||
> + folio_test_writeback(folio))
> + goto skip_pageout_locked;
> +
> + // Try to free the page
> + if (!mapping ||
> + !__remove_mapping(mapping, folio, true,
> + sc->target_mem_cgroup))
> + goto skip_pageout_locked;
> +
> + nr_reclaimed += folio_nr_pages(folio);
> + folio_unlock(folio);
> + continue;
> +
> + case PAGE_CLEAN:
> + if (!mapping ||
> + !__remove_mapping(mapping, folio, true,
> + sc->target_mem_cgroup))
> + goto skip_pageout_locked;
> +
> + nr_reclaimed += folio_nr_pages(folio);
> + folio_unlock(folio);
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> +skip_pageout_locked:
> + folio_unlock(folio);
> +skip_pageout:
> + list_add(&folio->lru, &ret_folios);
> + }
> + }
> +
> /* Migrate folios selected for demotion */
> nr_reclaimed += demote_folio_list(&demote_folios, pgdat);
> /* Folios that could not be demoted are still in @demote_folios */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-21 1:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-20 22:47 [PATCH] mm: Optimize TLB flushes during page reclaim Vinay Banakar
2025-01-21 0:05 ` Vinay Banakar
2025-01-22 8:59 ` Bharata B Rao
2025-01-22 11:09 ` Vinay Banakar
2025-01-22 11:31 ` Bharata B Rao
2025-01-22 13:28 ` Vinay Banakar
2025-01-22 20:05 ` SeongJae Park
2025-01-23 17:11 ` Vinay Banakar
2025-01-23 17:23 ` SeongJae Park
2025-01-23 18:17 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-01-21 1:43 ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2025-01-21 18:03 ` Vinay Banakar
2025-01-23 4:17 ` Rik van Riel
2025-01-23 19:16 ` Vinay Banakar
2025-01-28 22:01 ` Rik van Riel
2025-03-17 19:20 ` Rik van Riel
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=20250121014359.GA60549@system.software.com \
--to=byungchul@sk.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=kernel_team@skhynix.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=vny@google.com \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.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.