From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43FE1C3600B for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 13:50:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=y7LpNHnJQKnpbcCKx4tRkiCp2RK7r/SykfSI2xLMzv0=; b=hlmOUHJJ2wgVfEr+ztxgyc9WMx vpsZUvN9/9CSSKy5Lj/s3K7+4o3WwI5FDbhjz1SIJAG1H/PtGfwIXOwxL/z3XoLjCksZPYJjHzWLX wC/QcHSdckTtmoRy8VYTK6xohdhoSBcJYqvLNZGqN6qhr8xp0iUrHtNKM6E8gibDuNrdvy9YTkMLj HBCL6Jixc9WliDX1UeGavp5itZKdCzAy0QMTzsmTW238h6Q3LXvK9zwU6Otp1WeZobgVaWMhK82ag wst5xaQTjPPhN4D1mJb2e2sgOq2yxksV+bnMhViHZ6Bmt0fKqOEDvHMr+euA4jwHY0OxYbeHntghB x1ci/11g==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1txncV-0000000B7Zm-32v3; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 13:50:07 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1txnZC-0000000B771-3NnC for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 13:46:44 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40BA91063; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 06:46:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.57.86.146] (unknown [10.57.86.146]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D86D3F63F; Thu, 27 Mar 2025 06:46:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5582c321-9297-4d92-9e1f-497afa17f8be@arm.com> Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 09:46:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/11] Perf improvements for hugetlb and vmalloc on arm64 Content-Language: en-GB To: Uladzislau Rezki Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Pasha Tatashin , Andrew Morton , Christoph Hellwig , David Hildenbrand , "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" , Mark Rutland , Anshuman Khandual , Alexandre Ghiti , Kevin Brodsky , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20250304150444.3788920-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com> From: Ryan Roberts In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20250327_064642_907924_80D37F3F X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.84 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 27/03/2025 08:16, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 03:04:30PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> This is v3 of a series to improve performance for hugetlb and vmalloc on arm64. >> Although some of these patches are core-mm, advice from Andrew was to go via the >> arm64 tree. Hopefully I can get some ACKs from mm folks. >> >> The 2 key performance improvements are 1) enabling the use of contpte-mapped >> blocks in the vmalloc space when appropriate (which reduces TLB pressure). There >> were already hooks for this (used by powerpc) but they required some tidying and >> extending for arm64. And 2) batching up barriers when modifying the vmalloc >> address space for upto 30% reduction in time taken in vmalloc(). >> >> vmalloc() performance was measured using the test_vmalloc.ko module. Tested on >> Apple M2 and Ampere Altra. Each test had loop count set to 500000 and the whole >> test was repeated 10 times. >> > I will have a look and review just give me some time :) Thanks for the reviews - appreciate it! > > -- > Uladzislau Rezki