From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
Cc: 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: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 13:53:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260323135317.0b702a575eeef93332ba2519@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260309020711.20831-1-lance.yang@linux.dev>
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.
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!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-23 20:53 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 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2026-03-24 6:14 ` [PATCH v7 0/2] skip redundant sync IPIs when TLB flush sent them Lance Yang
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=20260323135317.0b702a575eeef93332ba2519@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--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=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--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