From: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: ryan.roberts@arm.com, david@redhat.com, willy@infradead.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com,
vbabka@suse.cz, jannh@google.com, anshuman.khandual@arm.com,
peterx@redhat.com, joey.gouly@arm.com, ioworker0@gmail.com,
baohua@kernel.org, kevin.brodsky@arm.com,
quic_zhenhuah@quicinc.com, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu,
yangyicong@hisilicon.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
hughd@google.com, yang@os.amperecomputing.com, ziy@nvidia.com,
Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 0/7] Optimize mprotect() for large folios
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 14:32:37 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250718090244.21092-1-dev.jain@arm.com> (raw)
Use folio_pte_batch() to optimize change_pte_range(). On arm64, if the ptes
are painted with the contig bit, then ptep_get() will iterate through all
16 entries to collect a/d bits. Hence this optimization will result in
a 16x reduction in the number of ptep_get() calls. Next,
ptep_modify_prot_start() will eventually call contpte_try_unfold() on
every contig block, thus flushing the TLB for the complete large folio
range. Instead, use get_and_clear_full_ptes() so as to elide TLBIs on
each contig block, and only do them on the starting and ending
contig block.
For split folios, there will be no pte batching; the batch size returned
by folio_pte_batch() will be 1. For pagetable split folios, the ptes will
still point to the same large folio; for arm64, this results in the
optimization described above, and for other arches, a minor improvement
is expected due to a reduction in the number of function calls.
mm-selftests pass on arm64. I have some failing tests on my x86 VM already;
no new tests fail as a result of this patchset.
We use the following test cases to measure performance, mprotect()'ing
the mapped memory to read-only then read-write 40 times:
Test case 1: Mapping 1G of memory, touching it to get PMD-THPs, then
pte-mapping those THPs
Test case 2: Mapping 1G of memory with 64K mTHPs
Test case 3: Mapping 1G of memory with 4K pages
Average execution time on arm64, Apple M3:
Before the patchset:
T1: 2.1 seconds T2: 2 seconds T3: 1 second
After the patchset:
T1: 0.65 seconds T2: 0.7 seconds T3: 1.1 seconds
Observing T1/T2 and T3 before the patchset, we also remove the regression
introduced by ptep_get() on a contpte block. And, for large folios we get
an almost 74% performance improvement, albeit the trade-off being a slight
degradation in the small folio case.
For x86:
Before the patchset:
T1: 3.75 seconds T2: 3.7 seconds T3: 3.85 seconds
After the patchset:
T1: 3.7 seconds T2: 3.7 seconds T3: 3.9 seconds
So there is a minor improvement due to reduction in number of function
calls, and a slight degradation in the small folio case due to the
overhead of vm_normal_folio() + folio_test_large().
Here is the test program:
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <sys/mman.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#define SIZE (1024*1024*1024)
unsigned long pmdsize = (1UL << 21);
unsigned long pagesize = (1UL << 12);
static void pte_map_thps(char *mem, size_t size)
{
size_t offs;
int ret = 0;
/* PTE-map each THP by temporarily splitting the VMAs. */
for (offs = 0; offs < size; offs += pmdsize) {
ret |= madvise(mem + offs, pagesize, MADV_DONTFORK);
ret |= madvise(mem + offs, pagesize, MADV_DOFORK);
}
if (ret) {
fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: mprotect() failed\n");
exit(1);
}
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
char *p;
int ret = 0;
p = mmap((1UL << 30), SIZE, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
if (p != (1UL << 30)) {
perror("mmap");
return 1;
}
memset(p, 0, SIZE);
if (madvise(p, SIZE, MADV_NOHUGEPAGE))
perror("madvise");
explicit_bzero(p, SIZE);
pte_map_thps(p, SIZE);
for (int loops = 0; loops < 40; loops++) {
if (mprotect(p, SIZE, PROT_READ))
perror("mprotect"), exit(1);
if (mprotect(p, SIZE, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE))
perror("mprotect"), exit(1);
explicit_bzero(p, SIZE);
}
}
---
v4->v5:
- Add patch 4
- Add patch 1 (Lorenzo)
- For patch 2, instead of using nr_ptes returned from prot_numa_skip()
as a dummy for whether to skip or not, make that function return
boolean, and then use folio_pte_batch() to determine how much to
skip
- Split can_change_pte_writable() (Lorenzo)
- Implement patch 6 in a better way
v3->v4:
- Refactor skipping logic into a new function, edit patch 1 subject
to highlight it is only for MM_CP_PROT_NUMA case (David H)
- Refactor the optimization logic, add more documentation to the generic
batched functions, do not add clear_flush_ptes, squash patch 4
and 5 (Ryan)
v2->v3:
- Add comments for the new APIs (Ryan, Lorenzo)
- Instead of refactoring, use a "skip_batch" label
- Move arm64 patches at the end (Ryan)
- In can_change_pte_writable(), check AnonExclusive page-by-page (David H)
- Resolve implicit declaration; tested build on x86 (Lance Yang)
v1->v2:
- Rebase onto mm-unstable (6ebffe676fcf: util_macros.h: make the header more resilient)
- Abridge the anon-exclusive condition (Lance Yang)
Dev Jain (7):
mm: Refactor MM_CP_PROT_NUMA skipping case into new function
mm: Optimize mprotect() for MM_CP_PROT_NUMA by batch-skipping PTEs
mm: Add batched versions of ptep_modify_prot_start/commit
mm: Introduce FPB_RESPECT_WRITE for PTE batching infrastructure
mm: Split can_change_pte_writable() into private and shared parts
mm: Optimize mprotect() by PTE batching
arm64: Add batched versions of ptep_modify_prot_start/commit
arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 10 ++
arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 28 ++-
include/linux/pgtable.h | 84 ++++++++-
mm/internal.h | 11 +-
mm/mprotect.c | 295 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
5 files changed, 352 insertions(+), 76 deletions(-)
--
2.30.2
next reply other threads:[~2025-07-18 9:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-18 9:02 Dev Jain [this message]
2025-07-18 9:02 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] mm: Refactor MM_CP_PROT_NUMA skipping case into new function Dev Jain
2025-07-18 16:19 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-20 23:44 ` Barry Song
2025-07-21 3:44 ` Dev Jain
2025-07-22 11:05 ` Dev Jain
2025-07-22 11:25 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-23 13:57 ` Zi Yan
2025-07-18 9:02 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] mm: Optimize mprotect() for MM_CP_PROT_NUMA by batch-skipping PTEs Dev Jain
2025-07-18 16:40 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-22 11:26 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-23 14:25 ` Zi Yan
2025-07-18 9:02 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] mm: Add batched versions of ptep_modify_prot_start/commit Dev Jain
2025-07-18 17:05 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-20 23:59 ` Barry Song
2025-07-22 11:35 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-23 15:09 ` Zi Yan
2025-07-18 9:02 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] mm: Introduce FPB_RESPECT_WRITE for PTE batching infrastructure Dev Jain
2025-07-18 17:12 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-22 11:37 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-23 15:28 ` Zi Yan
2025-07-23 15:32 ` Dev Jain
2025-07-18 9:02 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] mm: Split can_change_pte_writable() into private and shared parts Dev Jain
2025-07-18 17:27 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-23 15:40 ` Zi Yan
2025-07-18 9:02 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] mm: Optimize mprotect() by PTE batching Dev Jain
2025-07-18 18:49 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-19 13:46 ` Dev Jain
2025-07-20 11:20 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-20 14:39 ` Dev Jain
2025-07-24 19:55 ` Zi Yan
2025-08-06 8:08 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-06 8:12 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-06 8:15 ` Will Deacon
2025-08-06 8:19 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-06 8:53 ` Dev Jain
2025-08-06 8:56 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-06 9:12 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-06 9:21 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-06 9:37 ` Dev Jain
2025-08-06 9:50 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-06 10:11 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-06 10:20 ` Dev Jain
2025-08-06 10:28 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-06 10:45 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-08-06 10:45 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
[not found] ` <1b3d4799-2a57-4f16-973b-82fc7b438862@arm.com>
2025-08-06 10:07 ` Dev Jain
2025-08-06 10:12 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-07-18 9:02 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] arm64: Add batched versions of ptep_modify_prot_start/commit Dev Jain
2025-07-18 18:50 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-21 15:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-07-18 9:50 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] Optimize mprotect() for large folios Dev Jain
2025-07-18 18:53 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
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=20250718090244.21092-1-dev.jain@arm.com \
--to=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kevin.brodsky@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=quic_zhenhuah@quicinc.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).