All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: lance.yang@linux.dev, peterz@infradead.org, david@kernel.org,
	dave.hansen@intel.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
	ypodemsk@redhat.com, hughd@google.com, will@kernel.org,
	aneesh.kumar@kernel.org, npiggin@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com,
	arnd@arndb.de, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, ziy@nvidia.com,
	baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com,
	npache@redhat.com, ryan.roberts@arm.com, dev.jain@arm.com,
	baohua@kernel.org, shy828301@gmail.com, riel@surriel.com,
	jannh@google.com, jgross@suse.com, seanjc@google.com,
	pbonzini@redhat.com, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com,
	virtualization@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ioworker0@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/2] skip redundant sync IPIs when TLB flush sent them
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:14:19 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260324061419.48613-1-lance.yang@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260323135317.0b702a575eeef93332ba2519@linux-foundation.org>


On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 01:53:17PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>On Mon,  9 Mar 2026 10:07:09 +0800 Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> When page table operations require synchronization with software/lockless
>> walkers, they call tlb_remove_table_sync_{one,rcu}() after flushing the
>> TLB (tlb->freed_tables or tlb->unshared_tables).
>> 
>> On architectures where the TLB flush already sends IPIs to all target CPUs,
>> the subsequent sync IPI broadcast is redundant. This is not only costly on
>> large systems where it disrupts all CPUs even for single-process page table
>> operations, but has also been reported to hurt RT workloads[1].
>> 
>> This series introduces tlb_table_flush_implies_ipi_broadcast() to check if
>> the prior TLB flush already provided the necessary synchronization. When
>> true, the sync calls can early-return.
>> 
>> A few cases rely on this synchronization:
>> 
>> 1) hugetlb PMD unshare[2]: The problem is not the freeing but the reuse
>>    of the PMD table for other purposes in the last remaining user after
>>    unsharing.
>> 
>> 2) khugepaged collapse[3]: Ensure no concurrent GUP-fast before collapsing
>>    and (possibly) freeing the page table / re-depositing it.
>> 
>> Two-step plan as David suggested[4]:
>> 
>> Step 1 (this series): Skip redundant sync when we're 100% certain the TLB
>> flush sent IPIs. INVLPGB is excluded because when supported, we cannot
>> guarantee IPIs were sent, keeping it clean and simple.
>> 
>> Step 2 (future work): Send targeted IPIs only to CPUs actually doing
>> software/lockless page table walks, benefiting all architectures.
>> 
>> Regarding Step 2, it obviously only applies to setups where Step 1 does not
>> apply: like x86 with INVLPGB or arm64. Step 2 work is ongoing; early
>> attempts showed ~3% GUP-fast overhead. Reducing the overhead requires more
>> work and tuning; it will be submitted separately once ready.
>> 
>> ...
>> 
>>  arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h      | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>>  arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h |  2 ++
>>  arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c       |  1 +
>>  arch/x86/mm/tlb.c               | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>  include/asm-generic/tlb.h       | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>  mm/mmu_gather.c                 | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>  6 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>Kinda straddles both MM and x86.
>
>I expect a v8 based on David's comments.

Yes, a v8 is on the way.

>One merge path is for the x86 people to take this, noting David's acks.
>
>The other merge path is via mm.git, if the x86 people can please
>perform review.
>
>And...  mm.git is basically full (overflowing) for this cycle and
>review/test has some catching up to do.  So I'd prefer to only take the
>important things.  This patchset is a performance improvement but
>contains no measurements to demonstrate the benefit, so I'm not able to
>determine its importance!

That's a fair point. I should have included numbers from the start.

On a 64-core Intel x86 server, the CAL interrupt count in
/proc/interrupts dropped from 646,316 to 785 when collapsing a 20 GiB
range with this series applied.

The larger the system, the more costly redundant broadcast IPIs become.

Thanks,
Lance

      reply	other threads:[~2026-03-24  6:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-09  2:07 [PATCH v7 0/2] skip redundant sync IPIs when TLB flush sent them Lance Yang
2026-03-09  2:07 ` [PATCH v7 1/2] mm/mmu_gather: prepare to skip redundant sync IPIs Lance Yang
2026-03-23 11:04   ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-09  2:07 ` [PATCH v7 2/2] x86/tlb: skip redundant sync IPIs for native TLB flush Lance Yang
2026-03-16  2:36   ` Lance Yang
2026-03-23 10:48     ` Lance Yang
2026-03-23 11:10   ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-24  5:48     ` Lance Yang
2026-03-23 20:53 ` [PATCH v7 0/2] skip redundant sync IPIs when TLB flush sent them Andrew Morton
2026-03-24  6:14   ` Lance Yang [this message]

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=20260324061419.48613-1-lance.yang@linux.dev \
    --to=lance.yang@linux.dev \
    --cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=npache@redhat.com \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@surriel.com \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=ypodemsk@redhat.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 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.