From: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Usama Arif <usamaarif642@gmail.com>,
kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/gup: batch contiguous PTE-mapped large folios in follow_page_mask()
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 09:53:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <db3d2c65-31f2-4430-bef4-4dae76135eed@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260729030234.2063885-3-riel@surriel.com>
On 7/29/26 05:02, Rik van Riel wrote:
> follow_page_mask() returns one page per call for a PTE-mapped large folio,
> so __get_user_pages() re-walks the page tables for every page of an mTHP
> even though the folio maps a contiguous run. The huge PMD and PUD paths
> already return the whole mapping in one step.
>
> Report the contiguous run for the PTE case too. follow_pte_batch() uses
> folio_pte_batch_flags() to count consecutive present PTEs that map
> consecutive pages of the same folio with a uniform write bit, bounded by
> the page table, @end, the VMA, and the folio itself.
>
> Keep the per-PTE guarantees that follow_page_pte() makes for the head page.
> folio_pte_batch_flags() with FPB_RESPECT_WRITE stops the run at a change in
> the write bit, so the whole run matches the head.
>
> A writable run is safe for any access: a writable anon page is exclusive,
> so gup_must_unshare() cannot fire, and FOLL_WRITE is satisfied.
>
> A read-only run is batched only for a plain read, since FOLL_WRITE would
> need a COW fault per page and FOLL_PIN would need a per-page
> gup_must_unshare() check.
>
> Measured with mm/gup_test.c (PIN_LONGTERM_BENCHMARK, the slow
> pin_user_pages() path) on a 256 MB MADV_HUGEPAGE anonymous region in a
> 4 CPU VM, median get time over 16 iterations. Each folio size was confirmed
> through the per-size anon_fault_alloc counters (4096 folios for 64 kB, 128
> for 2 MB):
>
> gup_test -L -m 256 -n 65536 -r 16 -t
> before after
> 64 kB mTHP 3140 us 412 us (7.6x)
> 2 MB THP (control) 78 us 76 us
> 4 kB base (control) 3010 us 3042 us
>
> The PMD-mapped 2 MB THP already returns the whole mapping in one step, so
> it stays fast and unchanged. The 4 kB baseline shows the per-page walk cost
> that the 64 kB case paid before this change; only the PTE-mapped large
> folio case improves.
>
> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4.8
> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
> ---
> mm/gup.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> index 3437cd3407d5..8c6ad1ee7ccc 100644
> --- a/mm/gup.c
> +++ b/mm/gup.c
> @@ -805,6 +805,43 @@ static inline bool can_follow_write_pte(pte_t pte, struct page *page,
> return !userfaultfd_pte_wp(vma, pte);
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Count the pages, starting at @address and bounded by @end, that a PTE-mapped
> + * large @folio maps contiguously and that can be returned together with the
> + * page at @address: consecutive present PTEs mapping consecutive pages of
> + * @folio with a uniform write bit, within this VMA and a single page table.
> + * Returns at least 1.
> + *
> + * gup_must_unshare() and the write-fault check are per PTE. A writable run is
> + * always safe: a writable anon page is exclusive, and FOLL_WRITE is satisfied.
> + * A read-only run is only safe for a plain read; FOLL_WRITE would need a COW
> + * fault per page and FOLL_PIN would need a per-page gup_must_unshare() check,
> + * so those fall back to a single page.
> + */
Drop all of these comments and rather comment in the function on the important
bits. For example, the gup_must_unshare() logic belongs above the relevant code
below. If we cannot easily sort it out.
> +static unsigned long follow_pte_batch(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> + unsigned long address, unsigned long end, struct folio *folio,
> + struct page *page, pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte, unsigned int flags)
Why pass the "page" when it is not even used?
Maybe it should be used? :)
In mm/mprotect.c we do have a page_anon_exclusive_batch() helper already that
would do the right thing. See below.
> +{
> + pte_t batch_pte = pte;
> + unsigned long max;
> +
> + if (!pte_write(pte) && (flags & (FOLL_WRITE | FOLL_PIN)))
> + return 1;
This is really only required for anonymous folios, though.
So likely you could instead just do after the folio_pte_batch_flags() a
nr = folio_pte_batch_flags() ...
if (nr == 1 || !folio_test_anon(folio) || pte_write(pte))
return nr;
/* Careful with gup_must_unshare(). */
return page_anon_exclusive_batch(0, nr, page, PageAnonExclusive(page));
I'll note that the page_anon_exclusive_batch() helper is rather ugly, maybe
you'd just want a nicer one local to this function. It's pretty small in the
end, so you might also just open code a simple loop over PageAnonExclusive().
> +
> + /*
> + * folio_pte_batch_flags() scans forward from @ptep, so the run must
> + * stay within this page table: bound it by the PMD as well as @end and
> + * the VMA, since a large folio can be PTE-mapped across a PMD boundary.
> + */
> + max = min((pmd_addr_end(address, end) - address) >> PAGE_SHIFT,
> + (vma->vm_end - address) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> + if (max <= 1)
> + return 1;
> +
> + return folio_pte_batch_flags(folio, vma, ptep, &batch_pte, max,
> + FPB_RESPECT_WRITE);
> +}
> +
> static struct page *follow_page_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> unsigned long address, unsigned long end, pmd_t *pmd,
> unsigned int flags, unsigned long *nr_pages)
> @@ -893,6 +930,14 @@ static struct page *follow_page_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> folio_mark_accessed(folio);
> }
>
> + /*
> + * A PTE-mapped large folio can be handed back as a contiguous batch,
> + * so the caller advances over the whole run in one step instead of
> + * walking the page tables for every page.
> + */
That comment can be dropped, the code is self-explaining.
> + if (folio_test_large(folio))
> + *nr_pages = follow_pte_batch(vma, address, end, folio, page,
> + ptep, pte, flags);
> out:
> pte_unmap_unlock(ptep, ptl);
> return page;
Thanks for working on this!
--
Cheers,
David
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-29 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-29 3:02 [PATCH 0/2] mm/gup: batch PTE-mapped large folios in follow_page_mask() Rik van Riel
2026-07-29 3:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm/gup: pass an end address to follow_page_mask() and return a page count Rik van Riel
2026-07-29 7:16 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-07-29 17:31 ` Rik van Riel
2026-07-29 3:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm/gup: batch contiguous PTE-mapped large folios in follow_page_mask() Rik van Riel
2026-07-29 7:53 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm) [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=db3d2c65-31f2-4430-bef4-4dae76135eed@kernel.org \
--to=david@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=usamaarif642@gmail.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=willy@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