From: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>
Cc: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Liam R.Howlett" <howlett@gmail.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
kernel-team@meta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] mm/madvise: batch tlb flushes for MADV_FREE
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2025 11:49:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250408184947.62625-1-sj@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12a8989c-c4f3-45a5-a66e-06ef7c2ef876@lucifer.local>
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 13:58:18 +0100 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 02:06:58PM -0700, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > MADV_FREE handling for [process_]madvise() flushes tlb for each vma of
> > each address range. Update the logic to do tlb flushes in a batched
> > way. Initialize an mmu_gather object from do_madvise() and
> > vector_madvise(), which are the entry level functions for
> > [process_]madvise(), respectively. And pass those objects to the
> > function for per-vma work, via madvise_behavior struct. Make the
> > per-vma logic not flushes tlb on their own but just saves the tlb
> > entries to the received mmu_gather object. Finally, the entry level
> > functions flush the tlb entries that gathered for the entire user
> > request, at once.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
>
> Other than some nitty stuff, and a desire for some careful testing of the
> horrid edge case that err... I introduced :P this looks fine, so:
>
> Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>
Thank you for your kind review! I will make the next revision following your
suggestions as I answered below.
>
> > ---
> > mm/madvise.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/madvise.c b/mm/madvise.c
> > index 8bcfdd995d18..564095e381b2 100644
> > --- a/mm/madvise.c
> > +++ b/mm/madvise.c
> > @@ -799,12 +799,13 @@ static const struct mm_walk_ops madvise_free_walk_ops = {
> > .walk_lock = PGWALK_RDLOCK,
> > };
> >
> > -static int madvise_free_single_vma(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > - unsigned long start_addr, unsigned long end_addr)
> > +static int madvise_free_single_vma(
> > + struct madvise_behavior *behavior, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>
> This is pedantic, but elsewhere you differentiate between int behavior and
> struct madvise_behavior by referringt to the later as madv_behavior.
>
> The naming kind of sucks in general though.
>
> But for consistency, let's maybe rename this to madv_behavior, and we can
> maybe do a commit later to do a rename across the board?
I completely agree. I will rename so in the next spin.
>
> > + unsigned long start_addr, unsigned long end_addr)
> > {
> > struct mm_struct *mm = vma->vm_mm;
> > struct mmu_notifier_range range;
> > - struct mmu_gather tlb;
> > + struct mmu_gather *tlb = behavior->tlb;
> >
> > /* MADV_FREE works for only anon vma at the moment */
> > if (!vma_is_anonymous(vma))
[...]
> > @@ -953,7 +951,7 @@ static long madvise_dontneed_free(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > if (action == MADV_DONTNEED || action == MADV_DONTNEED_LOCKED)
> > return madvise_dontneed_single_vma(vma, start, end);
> > else if (action == MADV_FREE)
> > - return madvise_free_single_vma(vma, start, end);
> > + return madvise_free_single_vma(behavior, vma, start, end);
> > else
> > return -EINVAL;
>
> On error paths, do we correctly finish the batched (botched? :P) TLB
> operation?
Yes, the change calls tlb_finish_mmu() and tlb_gather_mmu() as needed in the
error paths. Of course I might forgot calling those in some edge cases.
Please let me know if you find such mistakes.
>
> > }
[...]
> > @@ -1841,14 +1873,17 @@ static ssize_t vector_madvise(struct mm_struct *mm, struct iov_iter *iter,
> > }
> >
> > /* Drop and reacquire lock to unwind race. */
> > + madvise_finish_tlb(&madv_behavior);
> > madvise_unlock(mm, behavior);
> > madvise_lock(mm, behavior);
> > + madvise_init_tlb(&madv_behavior, mm);
> > continue;
>
> Have you found a way in which to test this? Perhaps force this case and
> find a means of asserting the TLB flushing behaves as expected? I think
> we're ok from the logic, but it's such a tricky one it'd be good to find a
> means of doing so, albeit in a manual way.
No, unfortunately I haven't found a good way to test this case.
>
> > }
> > if (ret < 0)
> > break;
> > iov_iter_advance(iter, iter_iov_len(iter));
> > }
> > + madvise_finish_tlb(&madv_behavior);
> > madvise_unlock(mm, behavior);
> >
> > ret = (total_len - iov_iter_count(iter)) ? : ret;
> > --
> > 2.39.5
Thanks,
SJ
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-08 18:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-04 21:06 [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/madvise: batch tlb flushes for MADV_DONTNEED and MADV_FREE SeongJae Park
2025-04-04 21:06 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] mm/madvise: define and use madvise_behavior struct for madvise_do_behavior() SeongJae Park
2025-04-04 21:06 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] mm/madvise: batch tlb flushes for MADV_FREE SeongJae Park
2025-04-08 12:58 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-04-08 18:49 ` SeongJae Park [this message]
2025-04-04 21:06 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] mm/memory: split non-tlb flushing part from zap_page_range_single() SeongJae Park
2025-04-08 13:29 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-04-08 20:12 ` SeongJae Park
2025-04-09 10:37 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-04-04 21:07 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] mm/madvise: batch tlb flushes for MADV_DONTNEED[_LOCKED] SeongJae Park
2025-04-08 13:36 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-04-08 20:16 ` SeongJae Park
2025-04-08 13:44 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] mm/madvise: batch tlb flushes for MADV_DONTNEED and MADV_FREE Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-04-08 20:23 ` SeongJae Park
[not found] <20250405013136.3863-1-hdanton@sina.com>
2025-04-05 16:30 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] mm/madvise: batch tlb flushes for MADV_FREE SeongJae Park
2025-04-05 23:46 ` SeongJae Park
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=20250408184947.62625-1-sj@kernel.org \
--to=sj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=howlett@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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).