From: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: lance.yang@linux.dev, peterz@infradead.org, david@kernel.org,
dave.hansen@intel.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
ypodemsk@redhat.com, hughd@google.com, will@kernel.org,
aneesh.kumar@kernel.org, npiggin@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com,
arnd@arndb.de, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, ziy@nvidia.com,
baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com,
npache@redhat.com, ryan.roberts@arm.com, dev.jain@arm.com,
baohua@kernel.org, shy828301@gmail.com, riel@surriel.com,
jannh@google.com, jgross@suse.com, seanjc@google.com,
pbonzini@redhat.com, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com,
virtualization@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ioworker0@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/2] skip redundant sync IPIs when TLB flush sent them
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 14:14:19 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260324061419.48613-1-lance.yang@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260323135317.0b702a575eeef93332ba2519@linux-foundation.org>
On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 01:53:17PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>On Mon, 9 Mar 2026 10:07:09 +0800 Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> When page table operations require synchronization with software/lockless
>> walkers, they call tlb_remove_table_sync_{one,rcu}() after flushing the
>> TLB (tlb->freed_tables or tlb->unshared_tables).
>>
>> On architectures where the TLB flush already sends IPIs to all target CPUs,
>> the subsequent sync IPI broadcast is redundant. This is not only costly on
>> large systems where it disrupts all CPUs even for single-process page table
>> operations, but has also been reported to hurt RT workloads[1].
>>
>> This series introduces tlb_table_flush_implies_ipi_broadcast() to check if
>> the prior TLB flush already provided the necessary synchronization. When
>> true, the sync calls can early-return.
>>
>> A few cases rely on this synchronization:
>>
>> 1) hugetlb PMD unshare[2]: The problem is not the freeing but the reuse
>> of the PMD table for other purposes in the last remaining user after
>> unsharing.
>>
>> 2) khugepaged collapse[3]: Ensure no concurrent GUP-fast before collapsing
>> and (possibly) freeing the page table / re-depositing it.
>>
>> Two-step plan as David suggested[4]:
>>
>> Step 1 (this series): Skip redundant sync when we're 100% certain the TLB
>> flush sent IPIs. INVLPGB is excluded because when supported, we cannot
>> guarantee IPIs were sent, keeping it clean and simple.
>>
>> Step 2 (future work): Send targeted IPIs only to CPUs actually doing
>> software/lockless page table walks, benefiting all architectures.
>>
>> Regarding Step 2, it obviously only applies to setups where Step 1 does not
>> apply: like x86 with INVLPGB or arm64. Step 2 work is ongoing; early
>> attempts showed ~3% GUP-fast overhead. Reducing the overhead requires more
>> work and tuning; it will be submitted separately once ready.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> arch/x86/include/asm/tlb.h | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>> arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h | 2 ++
>> arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 1 +
>> arch/x86/mm/tlb.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
>> include/asm-generic/tlb.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>> mm/mmu_gather.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
>> 6 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>Kinda straddles both MM and x86.
>
>I expect a v8 based on David's comments.
Yes, a v8 is on the way.
>One merge path is for the x86 people to take this, noting David's acks.
>
>The other merge path is via mm.git, if the x86 people can please
>perform review.
>
>And... mm.git is basically full (overflowing) for this cycle and
>review/test has some catching up to do. So I'd prefer to only take the
>important things. This patchset is a performance improvement but
>contains no measurements to demonstrate the benefit, so I'm not able to
>determine its importance!
That's a fair point. I should have included numbers from the start.
On a 64-core Intel x86 server, the CAL interrupt count in
/proc/interrupts dropped from 646,316 to 785 when collapsing a 20 GiB
range with this series applied.
The larger the system, the more costly redundant broadcast IPIs become.
Thanks,
Lance
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-24 6:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-09 2:07 [PATCH v7 0/2] skip redundant sync IPIs when TLB flush sent them Lance Yang
2026-03-09 2:07 ` [PATCH v7 1/2] mm/mmu_gather: prepare to skip redundant sync IPIs Lance Yang
2026-03-23 11:04 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-09 2:07 ` [PATCH v7 2/2] x86/tlb: skip redundant sync IPIs for native TLB flush Lance Yang
2026-03-16 2:36 ` Lance Yang
2026-03-23 10:48 ` Lance Yang
2026-03-23 11:10 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-03-24 5:48 ` Lance Yang
2026-03-23 20:53 ` [PATCH v7 0/2] skip redundant sync IPIs when TLB flush sent them Andrew Morton
2026-03-24 6:14 ` Lance Yang [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=20260324061419.48613-1-lance.yang@linux.dev \
--to=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=ypodemsk@redhat.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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