* Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] mm: improve large folio readahead for exec memory
2026-05-22 19:20 ` [PATCH v5 0/2] mm: improve large folio readahead for exec memory Andrew Morton
@ 2026-05-25 15:01 ` Usama Arif
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Usama Arif @ 2026-05-25 15:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: david, willy, ryan.roberts, linux-mm, r, jack, Andrew Donnellan,
apopple, baohua, baolin.wang, brauner, catalin.marinas, dev.jain,
kees, kevin.brodsky, lance.yang, Liam R.Howlett, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel, ljs, mhocko, npache, pasha.tatashin,
rmclure, rppt, surenb, vbabka, Al Viro, wilts.infradead.org, ziy,
hannes, kas, shakeel.butt, kernel-team
On 22/05/2026 20:20, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 2026 09:23:46 -0700 Usama Arif <usama.arif@linux.dev> wrote:
>
>> Two checks in do_sync_mmap_readahead() limit large-folio readahead:
>>
>> 1. The mmap_miss heuristic is meant to throttle wasteful speculative
>> readahead. It is currently also applied to the VM_EXEC readahead
>> path, which is targeted rather than speculative. Once mmap_miss exceeds
>> MMAP_LOTSAMISS, exec readahead - including the large-folio
>> order requested by exec_folio_order() - is disabled. On
>> configurations where the mmap_miss decrement paths are not
>> active (see patch 1) the counter only grows, so exec readahead
>> is permanently disabled after the first 100 faults.
>>
>> 2. The force_thp_readahead path is gated only on
>> HPAGE_PMD_ORDER <= MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER and always drives the
>> readahead at HPAGE_PMD_ORDER. Configurations where
>> HPAGE_PMD_ORDER exceeds MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER never reach this
>> path, even when the mapping itself supports usefully large
>> folios well below the cap.
>>
>> Both issues are most visible on arm64 with a 64K base page size,
>> where HPAGE_PMD_ORDER is 13 (512MB) -- above MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER
>> (11) -- and where fault_around_pages collapses to 1 disabling
>> should_fault_around() (one of the two mmap_miss decrement sites).
>> However the fixes are architecture-agnostic: patch 1 reflects the
>> nature of VM_EXEC readahead regardless of base page size, and
>> patch 2 generalises the gate so any mapping advertising a usefully
>> large maximum folio order can benefit.
>>
>> I created a benchmark that mmaps a large executable file and calls
>> RET-stub functions at PAGE_SIZE offsets across it. "Cold" measures
>> fault + readahead cost. "Random" first faults in all pages with a
>> sequential sweep (not measured), then measures time for calling random
>> offsets, isolating iTLB miss cost for scattered execution.
>>
>> The benchmark results on Neoverse V2 (Grace), arm64 with 64K base pages,
>> 512MB executable file on ext4, averaged over 3 runs:
>>
>> Phase | Baseline | Patched | Improvement
>> -----------|--------------|--------------|------------------
>> Cold fault | 83.4 ms | 41.3 ms | 50% faster
>> Random | 76.0 ms | 58.3 ms | 23% faster
>
> Well that's nice.
>
> AI review might have found a few things:
> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260522162422.3856502-1-usama.arif@linux.dev
>
Thanks Andrew! So sashiko seems to have brought out some interesting problems,
some of which are pre-existing. For example, the decrement sites for mmap_miss
in do_async_mmap_readahead() and filemap_map_pages() dont skip for VM_SEQ_READ.
I have sent this as an independent patch in [1].
I will send the next version of this series on top of [1] in a few days
addressing the rest of the issues raised by sashiko.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260525145751.2671248-1-usama.arif@linux.dev/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread