From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andres Lagar-Cavilla <andreslc@google.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@kernel.org>, Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
Jianyu Zhan <nasa4836@gmail.com>,
Paul Cassella <cassella@cray.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Peter Feiner <pfeiner@google.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: get_user_pages_locked|unlocked to leverage VM_FAULT_RETRY
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 17:53:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141002155348.GI2342@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141002125638.GE6324@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 02:56:38PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 02:50:52PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 02:31:17PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 05:36:11PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > For all these and the other _fast() users, is there an actual limit to
> > > > the nr_pages passed in? Because we used to have the 64 pages limit from
> > > > DIO, but without that we get rather long IRQ-off latencies.
> > >
> > > Ok, I would tend to think this is an issue to solve in gup_fast
> > > implementation, I wouldn't blame or modify the callers for it.
> > >
> > > I don't think there's anything that prevents gup_fast to enable irqs
> > > after certain number of pages have been taken, nop; and disable the
> > > irqs again.
> > >
> >
> > Agreed, I once upon a time had a patch set converting the 2 (x86 and
> > powerpc) gup_fast implementations at the time, but somehow that never
> > got anywhere.
> >
> > Just saying we should probably do that before we add callers with
> > unlimited nr_pages.
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/6/24/457
>
> Clearly there's more work these days. Many more archs grew a gup.c
What about this? The alternative is that I do s/gup_fast/gup_unlocked/
to still retain the mmap_sem scalability benefit. It'd be still better
than the current plain gup() (and it would be equivalent for
userfaultfd point of view).
Or if the below is ok, should I modify all other archs too or are the
respective maintainers going to fix it themself? For example the arm*
gup_fast is a moving target in development on linux-mm right now and I
should only patch the gup_rcu version that didn't hit upstream yet. In
fact after that gup_rcu merge, supposedly the powerpc and sparc
gup_fast can be dropped from arch/* entirely and they can use the
generic version (otherwise having the arm gup_fast in mm/ instead of
arch/ would be a mistake). Right now, I wouldn't touch at least
arm/sparc/powerpc until the gup_rcu hit upstream as those are all
about to disappear.
Thanks,
Andrea
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-02 15:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-26 17:25 RFC: get_user_pages_locked|unlocked to leverage VM_FAULT_RETRY Andrea Arcangeli
2014-09-26 19:54 ` Andres Lagar-Cavilla
2014-09-28 14:00 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2014-10-01 15:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 12:31 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2014-10-02 12:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 12:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-02 15:53 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
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=20141002155348.GI2342@redhat.com \
--to=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreslc@google.com \
--cc=cassella@cray.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=gleb@kernel.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=nasa4836@gmail.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pfeiner@google.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.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 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).