From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Use the right pte val for compare in hugetlb_cow
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:33:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161018113341.e032f26c052dd63a8dca1f09@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161018154245.18023-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:12:45 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> We cannot use the pte value used in set_pte_at for pte_same comparison,
> because archs like ppc64, filter/add new pte flag in set_pte_at. Instead
> fetch the pte value inside hugetlb_cow. We are comparing pte value to
> make sure the pte didn't change since we dropped the page table lock.
> hugetlb_cow get called with page table lock held, and we can take a copy
> of the pte value before we drop the page table lock.
>
> With hugetlbfs, we optimize the MAP_PRIVATE write fault path with no
> previous mapping (huge_pte_none entries), by forcing a cow in the fault
> path. This avoid take an addition fault to covert a read-only mapping
> to read/write. Here we were comparing a recently instantiated pte (via
> set_pte_at) to the pte values from linux page table. As explained above
> on ppc64 such pte_same check returned wrong result, resulting in us
> taking an additional fault on ppc64.
>From my reading this is a minor performance improvement and a -stable
backport isn't needed. But it is unclear whether the impact warrants a
4.9 merge.
Please be careful about describing end-user visible impacts when fixing
bugs, thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-18 18:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-18 15:42 [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: Use the right pte val for compare in hugetlb_cow Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-10-18 18:33 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2016-10-19 5:11 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-10-19 3:22 ` Hillf Danton
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=20161018113341.e032f26c052dd63a8dca1f09@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jstancek@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@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).