[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070319200502.17168.17175.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:05:02 -0700
From: Adam Litke <agl@...ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Adam Litke <agl@...ibm.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ken Chen <kenchen@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/7] [RFC] hugetlb: pagetable_operations API (V2)
Andrew, given the favorable review of these patches the last time around, would
you consider them for the -mm tree? Does anyone else have any objections?
The page tables for hugetlb mappings are handled differently than page tables
for normal pages. Rather than integrating multiple page size support into the
core VM (which would tremendously complicate the code) some hooks were created.
This allows hugetlb special cases to be handled "out of line" by a separate
interface.
Hugetlbfs was the huge page interface chosen. At the time, large database
users were the only big users of huge pages and the hugetlbfs design meets
their needs pretty well. Over time, hugetlbfs has been expanded to enable new
uses of huge page memory with varied results. As features are added, the
semantics become a permanent part of the Linux API. This makes maintenance of
hugetlbfs an increasingly difficult task and inhibits the addition of features
and functionality in support of ever-changing hardware.
To remedy the situation, I propose an API (currently called
pagetable_operations). All of the current hugetlbfs-specific hooks are moved
into an operations struct that is attached to VMAs. The end result is a more
explicit and IMO a cleaner interface between hugetlbfs and the core VM. We are
then free to add other hugetlb interfaces (such as a /dev/zero-styled character
device) that can operate either in concert with or independent of hugetlbfs.
There should be no measurable performance impact for normal page users (we're
checking if pagetable_ops != NULL instead of checking for vm_flags &
VM_HUGETLB). Of course we do increase the VMA size by one pointer. For huge
pages, there is an added indirection for pt_op() calls. This patch series does
not change the logic of the the hugetlbfs operations, just moves them into the
pagetable_operations struct.
I did some pretty basic benchmarking of these patches on ppc64, x86, and x86_64
to get a feel for the fast-path performance impact. The following tables show
kernbench performance comparisons between a clean 2.6.20 kernel and one with my
patches applied. These numbers seem well within statistical noise to me.
Changes since V1:
- Made hugetlbfs_pagetable_ops const (Thanks Arjan)
--
KernBench Comparison (ppc64)
----------------------------
2.6.20-clean 2.6.20-pgtable_ops pct. diff
User CPU time 708.82 708.59 0.03
System CPU time 62.50 62.58 -0.13
Total CPU time 771.32 771.17 0.02
Elapsed time 115.40 115.35 0.04
KernBench Comparison (x86)
--------------------------
2.6.20-clean 2.6.20-pgtable_ops pct. diff
User CPU time 1382.62 1381.88 0.05
System CPU time 146.06 146.86 -0.55
Total CPU time 1528.68 1528.74 -0.00
Elapsed time 394.92 396.70 -0.45
KernBench Comparison (x86_64)
-----------------------------
2.6.20-clean 2.6.20-pgtable_ops pct. diff
User CPU time 559.39 557.97 0.25
System CPU time 65.10 66.17 -1.64
Total CPU time 624.49 624.14 0.06
Elapsed time 158.54 158.59 -0.03
The lack of a performance impact makes sense to me. The following is a
simplified instruction comparison for each case:
2.6.20-clean 2.6.20-pgtable_ops
------------------- --------------------
/* Load vm_flags */ /* Load pagetable_ops pointer */
mov 0x18(ecx),eax mov 0x48(ecx),eax
/* Test for VM_HUGETLB */ /* Test if it's NULL */
test $0x400000,eax test eax,eax
/* If set, jump to call stub */ /* If so, jump away to main code */
jne c0148f04 je c0148ba1
... /* Lookup the operation's function pointer */
/* copy_hugetlb_page_range call */ mov 0x4(eax),ebx
c0148f04: /* Test if it's NULL */
mov 0xffffff98(ebp),ecx test ebx,ebx
mov 0xffffff9c(ebp),edx /* If so, jump away to main code */
mov 0xffffffa0(ebp),eax je c0148ba1
call c01536e0 /* pagetable operation call */
mov 0xffffff9c(ebp),edx
mov 0xffffffa0(ebp),eax
call *ebx
For the common case (vma->pagetable_ops == NULL), we do almost the same thing as the current code: load and test. The third instruction is different in that we jump for the common case instead of jumping in the hugetlb case. I don't think this is a big deal though. If it is, would an unlikely() macro fix it?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists