From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, shak <dshaks@redhat.com>,
jakub@redhat.com, drepper@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lazy freeing of memory through MADV_FREE
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 12:16:06 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <462D6866.8030207@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <462D643C.5020709@redhat.com>
Rik van Riel wrote:
> This should fix the MADV_FREE code for PPC's hashed tlb.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>> Nick Piggin wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 3) because of this, we can treat any such accesses as
>>>>> happening simultaneously with the MADV_FREE and
>>>>> as illegal, aka undefined behaviour territory and
>>>>> we do not need to worry about them
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but I'm wondering if it is legal in all architectures.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's similar to trying to access memory during an munmap.
>>>
>>> You may be able to for a short time, but it'll come back to
>>> haunt you.
>>
>>
>> The question is whether the architecture specific tlb
>> flushing code will break or not.
>
>
> I guess we'll need to call tlb_remove_tlb_entry() inside the
> MADV_FREE code to keep powerpc happy.
>
> Thanks for pointing this one out.
>
>>> Even then we do. Each invocation of zap_pte_range() only touches
>>> one page table page, and it flushes the TLB before releasing the
>>> page table lock.
>>
>>
>> What kernel are you looking at? -rc7 and rc6-mm1 don't, AFAIKS.
>
>
> Oh dear. I see it now...
>
> The tlb end things inside zap_pte_range() are actually
> noops and the actual tlb flush only happens inside
> zap_page_range().
>
> I guess the fact that munmap gets the mmap_sem for
> writing should save us, though...
What about an unmap_mapping_range, or another MADV_FREE or
MADV_DONTNEED?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --- linux-2.6.20.x86_64/mm/memory.c.noppc 2007-04-23 21:50:09.000000000 -0400
> +++ linux-2.6.20.x86_64/mm/memory.c 2007-04-23 21:48:59.000000000 -0400
> @@ -679,6 +679,7 @@ static unsigned long zap_pte_range(struc
> }
> ptep_test_and_clear_dirty(vma, addr, pte);
> ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, addr, pte);
> + tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, pte, addr);
> SetPageLazyFree(page);
> if (PageActive(page))
> deactivate_tail_page(page);
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, shak <dshaks@redhat.com>,
jakub@redhat.com, drepper@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lazy freeing of memory through MADV_FREE
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 12:16:06 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <462D6866.8030207@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <462D643C.5020709@redhat.com>
Rik van Riel wrote:
> This should fix the MADV_FREE code for PPC's hashed tlb.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>> Nick Piggin wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 3) because of this, we can treat any such accesses as
>>>>> happening simultaneously with the MADV_FREE and
>>>>> as illegal, aka undefined behaviour territory and
>>>>> we do not need to worry about them
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but I'm wondering if it is legal in all architectures.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's similar to trying to access memory during an munmap.
>>>
>>> You may be able to for a short time, but it'll come back to
>>> haunt you.
>>
>>
>> The question is whether the architecture specific tlb
>> flushing code will break or not.
>
>
> I guess we'll need to call tlb_remove_tlb_entry() inside the
> MADV_FREE code to keep powerpc happy.
>
> Thanks for pointing this one out.
>
>>> Even then we do. Each invocation of zap_pte_range() only touches
>>> one page table page, and it flushes the TLB before releasing the
>>> page table lock.
>>
>>
>> What kernel are you looking at? -rc7 and rc6-mm1 don't, AFAIKS.
>
>
> Oh dear. I see it now...
>
> The tlb end things inside zap_pte_range() are actually
> noops and the actual tlb flush only happens inside
> zap_page_range().
>
> I guess the fact that munmap gets the mmap_sem for
> writing should save us, though...
What about an unmap_mapping_range, or another MADV_FREE or
MADV_DONTNEED?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --- linux-2.6.20.x86_64/mm/memory.c.noppc 2007-04-23 21:50:09.000000000 -0400
> +++ linux-2.6.20.x86_64/mm/memory.c 2007-04-23 21:48:59.000000000 -0400
> @@ -679,6 +679,7 @@ static unsigned long zap_pte_range(struc
> }
> ptep_test_and_clear_dirty(vma, addr, pte);
> ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, addr, pte);
> + tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, pte, addr);
> SetPageLazyFree(page);
> if (PageActive(page))
> deactivate_tail_page(page);
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-24 2:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 80+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-17 7:15 [PATCH] lazy freeing of memory through MADV_FREE Rik van Riel
2007-04-19 21:15 ` [PATCH] lazy freeing of memory through MADV_FREE 2/2 Rik van Riel
2007-04-20 21:03 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-20 21:03 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-20 21:24 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-20 21:24 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-21 7:37 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-04-21 7:37 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-04-21 16:32 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-21 16:32 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-20 20:57 ` [PATCH] lazy freeing of memory through MADV_FREE Andrew Morton
2007-04-20 20:57 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-20 21:38 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-20 21:38 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-20 22:06 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-20 22:06 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-20 23:52 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-20 23:52 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-21 0:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-04-21 0:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-04-21 3:58 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-21 3:58 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-21 7:12 ` Jakub Jelinek
2007-04-21 7:12 ` Jakub Jelinek
2007-04-23 4:36 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 4:36 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-22 2:36 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-22 2:36 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-22 2:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-22 2:50 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-22 6:31 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-22 6:31 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 0:16 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 0:16 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 3:53 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 3:53 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 3:58 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 3:58 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 10:07 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 10:07 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 10:12 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 10:12 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 3:59 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 3:59 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 9:20 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 10:21 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 10:21 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 10:31 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 10:31 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 10:35 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 10:35 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-23 10:44 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-24 1:15 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-24 1:15 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-24 1:58 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-24 2:16 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2007-04-24 2:16 ` Nick Piggin
2007-04-24 4:42 ` Paul Mackerras
2007-04-24 4:42 ` Paul Mackerras
2007-04-24 5:13 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-24 5:13 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-24 2:53 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-24 3:08 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-24 3:08 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-23 10:44 ` Jakub Jelinek
2007-04-23 10:44 ` Jakub Jelinek
2007-04-23 11:45 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 11:45 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 4:28 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-23 4:28 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-21 7:24 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-04-21 7:24 ` Hugh Dickins
2007-04-21 18:06 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-21 18:06 ` Rik van Riel
2007-04-22 8:18 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-22 8:18 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-22 9:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-04-22 9:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-04-22 16:55 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-04-22 16:55 ` Ulrich Drepper
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=462D6866.8030207@yahoo.com.au \
--to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=dshaks@redhat.com \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.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.