From: ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Laurent Dufour)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] arm64/mm: add speculative page fault
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 11:07:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9e7ab02c-a9af-71ed-afda-108e3b26b2ef@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1525247672-2165-2-git-send-email-opensource.ganesh@gmail.com>
On 02/05/2018 09:54, Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
> This patch enables the speculative page fault on the arm64
> architecture.
>
> I completed spf porting in 4.9. From the test result,
> we can see app launching time improved by about 10% in average.
> For the apps which have more than 50 threads, 15% or even more
> improvement can be got.
Thanks Ganesh,
That's a great improvement, could you please provide details about the apps and
the hardware you used ?
>
> Signed-off-by: Ganesh Mahendran <opensource.ganesh@gmail.com>
> ---
> This patch is on top of Laurent's v10 spf
> ---
> arch/arm64/mm/fault.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
> index 4165485..e7992a3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fault.c
> @@ -322,11 +322,13 @@ static void do_bad_area(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr, struct pt_regs *re
>
> static int __do_page_fault(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> unsigned int mm_flags, unsigned long vm_flags,
> - struct task_struct *tsk)
> + struct task_struct *tsk, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
> {
> - struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> int fault;
>
> + if (!vma || !can_reuse_spf_vma(vma, addr))
> + vma = find_vma(mm, addr);
> +
> vma = find_vma(mm, addr);
> fault = VM_FAULT_BADMAP;
> if (unlikely(!vma))
> @@ -371,6 +373,7 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr,
> int fault, major = 0;
> unsigned long vm_flags = VM_READ | VM_WRITE;
> unsigned int mm_flags = FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY | FAULT_FLAG_KILLABLE;
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
>
> if (notify_page_fault(regs, esr))
> return 0;
> @@ -409,6 +412,25 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr,
>
> perf_sw_event(PERF_COUNT_SW_PAGE_FAULTS, 1, regs, addr);
>
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT)) {
As suggested by Punit in his v10's review, the test on
CONFIG_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT is not needed as handle_speculative_fault() is
defined to return VM_FAULT_RETRY is the config is not set.
> + fault = handle_speculative_fault(mm, addr, mm_flags, &vma);
> + /*
> + * Page fault is done if VM_FAULT_RETRY is not returned.
> + * But if the memory protection keys are active, we don't know
> + * if the fault is due to key mistmatch or due to a
> + * classic protection check.
> + * To differentiate that, we will need the VMA we no
> + * more have, so let's retry with the mmap_sem held.
> + */
The check of VM_FAULT_SIGSEGV was needed on ppc64 because of the memory
protection key support, but as far as I know, this is not the case on arm64.
Isn't it ?
> + if (fault != VM_FAULT_RETRY &&
> + fault != VM_FAULT_SIGSEGV) {
> + perf_sw_event(PERF_COUNT_SW_SPF, 1, regs, addr);
> + goto done;
> + }
> + } else {
> + vma = NULL;
> + }
> +
> /*
> * As per x86, we may deadlock here. However, since the kernel only
> * validly references user space from well defined areas of the code,
> @@ -431,7 +453,7 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr,
> #endif
> }
>
> - fault = __do_page_fault(mm, addr, mm_flags, vm_flags, tsk);
> + fault = __do_page_fault(mm, addr, mm_flags, vm_flags, tsk, vma);
> major |= fault & VM_FAULT_MAJOR;
>
> if (fault & VM_FAULT_RETRY) {
> @@ -454,11 +476,21 @@ static int __kprobes do_page_fault(unsigned long addr, unsigned int esr,
> if (mm_flags & FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY) {
> mm_flags &= ~FAULT_FLAG_ALLOW_RETRY;
> mm_flags |= FAULT_FLAG_TRIED;
> +
> + /*
> + * Do not try to reuse this vma and fetch it
> + * again since we will release the mmap_sem.
> + */
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT))
> + vma = NULL;
> +
> goto retry;
> }
> }
> up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>
> +done:
> +
> /*
> * Handle the "normal" (no error) case first.
> */
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-02 9:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-02 7:54 [PATCH 1/2] arm64/mm: define ARCH_SUPPORTS_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT Ganesh Mahendran
2018-05-02 7:54 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64/mm: add speculative page fault Ganesh Mahendran
2018-05-02 9:07 ` Laurent Dufour [this message]
2018-05-04 6:25 ` Ganesh Mahendran
2018-05-02 14:07 ` kbuild test robot
2018-05-02 14:46 ` Punit Agrawal
2018-05-04 6:31 ` Ganesh Mahendran
2018-05-02 9:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm64/mm: define ARCH_SUPPORTS_SPECULATIVE_PAGE_FAULT Laurent Dufour
2018-05-02 11:05 ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-03 8:48 ` Chintan Pandya
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=9e7ab02c-a9af-71ed-afda-108e3b26b2ef@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).