linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
	will@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, Miko.Lenczewski@arm.com,
	dev.jain@arm.com, scott@os.amperecomputing.com, cl@gentwo.org
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: mm: support large block mapping when rodata=full
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 17:44:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e1283b35-dcab-4d0c-a1e0-3ef938fa496a@os.amperecomputing.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2d3e684-e3dc-41b5-9708-ca5926c55ebf@arm.com>



On 8/6/25 12:20 AM, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> On 05/08/2025 19:53, Yang Shi wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>> +    arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode();
>>>> +    ret = split_pgd(pgd_offset_k(start), start, end);
>>> My instinct still remains that it would be better not to iterate over the range
>>> here, but instead call a "split(start); split(end);" since we just want to split
>>> the start and end. So the code would be simpler and probably more performant if
>>> we get rid of all the iteration.
>> It should be more performant for splitting large range, especially the range
>> includes leaf mappings at different levels. But I had some optimization to skip
>> leaf mappings in this version, so it should be close to your implementation from
>> performance perspective. And it just walks the page table once instead of twice.
>> It should be more efficient for small split, for example, 4K.
> I guess this is the crux of our disagreement. I think the "walks the table once
> for 4K" is a micro optimization, which I doubt we would see on any benchmark
> results. In the absence of data, I'd prefer the simpler, smaller, easier to
> understand version.

I did a simple benchmark with module stressor from stress-ng. I used the 
below command line:
stress-ng --module 1 --module-name loop --module-ops 1000

It basically loads loop module 1000 times. I saw a slight slowdown (2% - 
3% slowdown, average time spent in 5 iterations) with your 
implementation on my AmpereOne machine. It shouldn't result in any 
noticeable slowdown for real life workloads per the data.

Thanks,
Yang

>
> Both implementations are on list now; perhaps the maintainers can steer us.
>
> Thanks,
> Ryan



  reply	other threads:[~2025-08-07  0:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-24 22:11 [v5 PATCH 0/4] arm64: support FEAT_BBM level 2 and large block mapping when rodata=full Yang Shi
2025-07-24 22:11 ` [PATCH 1/4] arm64: Enable permission change on arm64 kernel block mappings Yang Shi
2025-07-24 22:11 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: cpufeature: add AmpereOne to BBML2 allow list Yang Shi
2025-08-01 14:36   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-04 23:20   ` Christoph Lameter (Ampere)
2025-07-24 22:11 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm64: mm: support large block mapping when rodata=full Yang Shi
2025-07-29 12:34   ` Dev Jain
2025-08-05 21:28     ` Yang Shi
2025-08-06  0:10       ` Yang Shi
2025-08-01 14:35   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-04 10:07     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-05 18:53     ` Yang Shi
2025-08-06  7:20       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-07  0:44         ` Yang Shi [this message]
2025-07-24 22:11 ` [PATCH 4/4] arm64: mm: split linear mapping if BBML2 is not supported on secondary CPUs Yang Shi
2025-07-26 11:10   ` kernel test robot
2025-08-01 16:14   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-05 18:59     ` Yang Shi
2025-08-05  7:54   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-05 17:45     ` Yang Shi
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-05-31  2:41 [v4 PATCH 0/4] arm64: support FEAT_BBM level 2 and large block mapping when rodata=full Yang Shi
2025-05-31  2:41 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm64: mm: support " Yang Shi
2025-06-16 11:58   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-16 12:33     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-17 21:01       ` Yang Shi
2025-06-16 16:24   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-17 21:09     ` Yang Shi
2025-06-23 13:26       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-23 19:12         ` Yang Shi
2025-06-26 22:39         ` Yang Shi
2025-07-23 17:38         ` Dev Jain
2025-07-23 20:51           ` Yang Shi
2025-07-24 11:43             ` Dev Jain
2025-07-24 17:59               ` Yang Shi

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=e1283b35-dcab-4d0c-a1e0-3ef938fa496a@os.amperecomputing.com \
    --to=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=Miko.Lenczewski@arm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=cl@gentwo.org \
    --cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=scott@os.amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.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).