Message-ID: <20101125143520.GM6118@random.random>
Date:	Thu, 25 Nov 2010 15:35:20 +0100
From:	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
To:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	Adam Litke <agl@...ibm.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>, bpicco@...hat.com,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03 of 66] transparent hugepage support documentation

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:41:05AM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> libhugetlbfs can also automatically back shared memory, text and data
> with huge pages which THP cannot do. libhugetlbfs cannot demote and
> promote memory where THP can. They are not exactly like-with-like
> comparisons. How about;
> 
> "Transparent Hugepage Support is an alternative means of using huge pages for
> the backing of anonymous memory with huge pages that supports the automatic
> promotion and demotion of page sizes."
> 
> ?

Ok I changed it like this:

diff --git a/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt b/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt
--- a/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt
+++ b/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt
@@ -4,12 +4,13 @@
 
 Performance critical computing applications dealing with large memory
 working sets are already running on top of libhugetlbfs and in turn
-hugetlbfs. Transparent Hugepage Support is an alternative to
-libhugetlbfs that offers the same feature of libhugetlbfs but without
-the shortcomings of hugetlbfs (for KVM, JVM, HPC, even gcc etc..).
+hugetlbfs. Transparent Hugepage Support is an alternative means of
+using huge pages for the backing of virtual memory with huge pages
+that supports the automatic promotion and demotion of page sizes and
+without the shortcomings of hugetlbfs.
 
-In the future it can expand over the pagecache layer starting with
-tmpfs to reduce even further the hugetlbfs usages.
+Currently it only works for anonymous memory mappings but in the
+future it can expand over the pagecache layer starting with tmpfs.
 
 The reason applications are running faster is because of two
 factors. The first factor is almost completely irrelevant and it's not


> > +In the future it can expand over the pagecache layer starting with
> > +tmpfs to reduce even further the hugetlbfs usages.
> > +
> > +The reason applications are running faster is because of two
> > +factors. The first factor is almost completely irrelevant and it's not
> > +of significant interest because it'll also have the downside of
> > +requiring larger clear-page copy-page in page faults which is a
> > +potentially negative effect. The first factor consists in taking a
> > +single page fault for each 2M virtual region touched by userland (so
> > +reducing the enter/exit kernel frequency by a 512 times factor). This
> > +only matters the first time the memory is accessed for the lifetime of
> > +a memory mapping. The second long lasting and much more important
> > +factor will affect all subsequent accesses to the memory for the whole
> > +runtime of the application. The second factor consist of two
> > +components: 1) the TLB miss will run faster (especially with
> > +virtualization using nested pagetables but also on bare metal without
> > +virtualization)
> 
> Careful on that first statement. It's not necessarily true for bare metal
> as some processors show that the TLB miss handler for huge pages is slower
> than base pages. Not sure why but it seemed to be the case on P4 anyway
> (at least the one I have). Maybe it was a measurement error but on chips
> with split TLBs for page sizes, there is no guarantee they are the same speed.
> 
> It's probably true for virtualisation though considering the vastly reduced
> number of cache lines required to translate an address.
>
> I'd weaken the language for bare metal to say "almost always" but it's
> not a big deal.

Agreed.

diff --git a/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt b/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt
--- a/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt
+++ b/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt
@@ -23,14 +24,14 @@ a memory mapping. The second long lastin
 factor will affect all subsequent accesses to the memory for the whole
 runtime of the application. The second factor consist of two
 components: 1) the TLB miss will run faster (especially with
-virtualization using nested pagetables but also on bare metal without
-virtualization) and 2) a single TLB entry will be mapping a much
-larger amount of virtual memory in turn reducing the number of TLB
-misses. With virtualization and nested pagetables the TLB can be
-mapped of larger size only if both KVM and the Linux guest are using
-hugepages but a significant speedup already happens if only one of the
-two is using hugepages just because of the fact the TLB miss is going
-to run faster.
+virtualization using nested pagetables but almost always also on bare
+metal without virtualization) and 2) a single TLB entry will be
+mapping a much larger amount of virtual memory in turn reducing the
+number of TLB misses. With virtualization and nested pagetables the
+TLB can be mapped of larger size only if both KVM and the Linux guest
+are using hugepages but a significant speedup already happens if only
+one of the two is using hugepages just because of the fact the TLB
+miss is going to run faster.
 
 == Design ==
 

> > +With virtualization and nested pagetables the TLB can be
> > +mapped of larger size only if both KVM and the Linux guest are using
> > +hugepages but a significant speedup already happens if only one of the
> > +two is using hugepages just because of the fact the TLB miss is going
> > +to run faster.
> > +
> > +== Design ==
> > +
> > +- "graceful fallback": mm components which don't have transparent
> > +  hugepage knownledge fall back to breaking a transparent hugepage and
> 
> %s/knownledge/knowledge/

corrected.

> > +  working on the regular pages and their respective regular pmd/pte
> > +  mappings
> > +
> > +- if an hugepage allocation fails because of memory fragmentation,
> 
> s/an/a/

I'll trust you on this one ;).

> > +  regular pages should be gracefully allocated instead and mixed in
> > +  the same vma without any failure or significant delay and generally
> > +  without userland noticing
> > +
> 
> why "generally"? At worst the application will see varying performance
> characteristics but that applies to a lot more than THP.

Removed "generally".

> > +- if some task quits and more hugepages become available (either
> > +  immediately in the buddy or through the VM), guest physical memory
> > +  backed by regular pages should be relocated on hugepages
> > +  automatically (with khugepaged)
> > +
> > +- it doesn't require boot-time memory reservation and in turn it uses
> 
> neither does hugetlbfs.
> 
> > +  hugepages whenever possible (the only possible reservation here is
> > +  kernelcore= to avoid unmovable pages to fragment all the memory but
> > +  such a tweak is not specific to transparent hugepage support and
> > +  it's a generic feature that applies to all dynamic high order
> > +  allocations in the kernel)
> > +
> > +- this initial support only offers the feature in the anonymous memory
> > +  regions but it'd be ideal to move it to tmpfs and the pagecache
> > +  later
> > +
> > +Transparent Hugepage Support maximizes the usefulness of free memory
> > +if compared to the reservation approach of hugetlbfs by allowing all
> > +unused memory to be used as cache or other movable (or even unmovable
> > +entities).
> 
> hugetlbfs with memory overcommit offers something similar, particularly
> in combination with libhugetlbfs with can automatically fall back to base
> pages. I've run benchmarks comparing hugetlbfs using a static hugepage
> pool with hugetlbfs dynamically allocating hugepages as required with no
> discernable performance difference. So this statement is not strictly accurate.

Ok, but without libhugetlbfs fallback to regular pages splitting the
vma and creating a no-hugetlbfs one in the middle, it really requires
memory reservation to be _sure_ (libhugtlbfs runs outside of hugetlbfs
and I doubt it allows later collapsing like khugepaged provides,
furthermore I'm comparing kernel vs kernel not kernel vs
kernel+userlandwrapping)... So I think mentioning the fact THP doesn't
require memory reservation is more or less fair enough. I removed
"boot-time" though.

> > +It doesn't require reservation to prevent hugepage
> > +allocation failures to be noticeable from userland. It allows paging
> > +and all other advanced VM features to be available on the
> > +hugepages. It requires no modifications for applications to take
> > +advantage of it.
> > +
> > +Applications however can be further optimized to take advantage of
> > +this feature, like for example they've been optimized before to avoid
> > +a flood of mmap system calls for every malloc(4k). Optimizing userland
> > +is by far not mandatory and khugepaged already can take care of long
> > +lived page allocations even for hugepage unaware applications that
> > +deals with large amounts of memory.
> > +
> > +In certain cases when hugepages are enabled system wide, application
> > +may end up allocating more memory resources. An application may mmap a
> > +large region but only touch 1 byte of it, in that case a 2M page might
> > +be allocated instead of a 4k page for no good. This is why it's
> > +possible to disable hugepages system-wide and to only have them inside
> > +MADV_HUGEPAGE madvise regions.
> > +
> > +Embedded systems should enable hugepages only inside madvise regions
> > +to eliminate any risk of wasting any precious byte of memory and to
> > +only run faster.
> > +
> > +Applications that gets a lot of benefit from hugepages and that don't
> > +risk to lose memory by using hugepages, should use
> > +madvise(MADV_HUGEPAGE) on their critical mmapped regions.
> > +
> > +== sysfs ==
> > +
> > +Transparent Hugepage Support can be entirely disabled (mostly for
> > +debugging purposes) or only enabled inside MADV_HUGEPAGE regions (to
> > +avoid the risk of consuming more memory resources) or enabled system
> > +wide. This can be achieved with one of:
> > +
> > +echo always >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled
> > +echo madvise >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled
> > +echo never >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled
> > +
> > +It's also possible to limit defrag efforts in the VM to generate
> > +hugepages in case they're not immediately free to madvise regions or
> > +to never try to defrag memory and simply fallback to regular pages
> > +unless hugepages are immediately available.
> 
> This is the first mention of defrag but hey, it's not a paper :)

Not sure I get it this, is this too early or too late to mention
defrag? But yes this is not a paper so I guess I don't need to care ;)

> > +and how many milliseconds to wait in khugepaged between each pass (you
> > +can se this to 0 to run khugepaged at 100% utilization of one core):
> 
> s/se/set/

good eye ;)

> > +
> > +/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/scan_sleep_millisecs
> > +
> > +and how many milliseconds to wait in khugepaged if there's an hugepage
> > +allocation failure to throttle the next allocation attempt.
> > +
> > +/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/alloc_sleep_millisecs
> > +
> > +The khugepaged progress can be seen in the number of pages collapsed:
> > +
> > +/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/pages_collapsed
> > +
> > +for each pass:
> > +
> > +/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/full_scans
> > +
> > +== Boot parameter ==
> > +
> > +You can change the sysfs boot time defaults of Transparent Hugepage
> > +Support by passing the parameter "transparent_hugepage=always" or
> > +"transparent_hugepage=madvise" or "transparent_hugepage=never"
> > +(without "") to the kernel command line.
> > +
> > +== Need of restart ==
> > +
> 
> Need of application restart?
> 
> A casual reader might otherwise interpret it as a system restart for
> some godawful reason of their own.

Agreed.

> > +The transparent_hugepage/enabled values only affect future
> > +behavior. So to make them effective you need to restart any
> 
> s/behavior/behaviour/

Funny, after this change my spell checker asks me to rename behaviour
back to behavior. I'll stick to the spell checker, they are synonymous
anyway.

> > +In case you can't handle compound pages if they're returned by
> > +follow_page, the FOLL_SPLIT bit can be specified as parameter to
> > +follow_page, so that it will split the hugepages before returning
> > +them. Migration for example passes FOLL_SPLIT as parameter to
> > +follow_page because it's not hugepage aware and in fact it can't work
> > +at all on hugetlbfs (but it instead works fine on transparent
> 
> hugetlbfs pages can now migrate although it's only used by hwpoison.

Yep. I'll need to teach migrate to avoid splitting the hugepage to
migrate it too... (especially for numa, not much for hwpoison). And
the migration support for hugetlbfs now makes it more complicated to
migrate transhuge pages too with the same function because that code
isn't inside a VM_HUGETLB check... Worst case we can check the hugepage
destructor to differentiate the two, I've yet to check that. Surely
it's feasible and mostly an implementation issue.

> > +Code walking pagetables but unware about huge pmds can simply call
> > +split_huge_page_pmd(mm, pmd) where the pmd is the one returned by
> > +pmd_offset. It's trivial to make the code transparent hugepage aware
> > +by just grepping for "pmd_offset" and adding split_huge_page_pmd where
> > +missing after pmd_offset returns the pmd. Thanks to the graceful
> > +fallback design, with a one liner change, you can avoid to write
> > +hundred if not thousand of lines of complex code to make your code
> > +hugepage aware.
> > +
> 
> It'd be nice if you could point to a specific example but by no means
> mandatory.

Ok:

diff --git a/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt b/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt
--- a/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt
+++ b/Documentation/vm/transhuge.txt
@@ -226,6 +226,20 @@ but you can't handle it natively in your
 calling split_huge_page(page). This is what the Linux VM does before
 it tries to swapout the hugepage for example.
 
+Example to make mremap.c transparent hugepage aware with a one liner
+change:
+
+diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c
+--- a/mm/mremap.c
++++ b/mm/mremap.c
+@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ static pmd_t *get_old_pmd(struct mm_stru
+ 		return NULL;
+ 
+ 	pmd = pmd_offset(pud, addr);
++	split_huge_page_pmd(mm, pmd);
+ 	if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad(pmd))
+ 		return NULL;
+
 == Locking in hugepage aware code ==
 
 We want as much code as possible hugepage aware, as calling


> Ok, I'll need to read the rest of the series to verify if this is
> correct but by and large it looks good. I think some of the language is
> stronger than it should be and some of the comparisons with libhugetlbfs
> are a bit off but I'd be naturally defensive on that topic. Make the
> suggested changes if you like but if you don't, it shouldn't affect the
> series.

I hope it looks better now, thanks!

---------
= Transparent Hugepage Support =

== Objective ==

Performance critical computing applications dealing with large memory
working sets are already running on top of libhugetlbfs and in turn
hugetlbfs. Transparent Hugepage Support is an alternative means of
using huge pages for the backing of virtual memory with huge pages
that supports the automatic promotion and demotion of page sizes and
without the shortcomings of hugetlbfs.

Currently it only works for anonymous memory mappings but in the
future it can expand over the pagecache layer starting with tmpfs.

The reason applications are running faster is because of two
factors. The first factor is almost completely irrelevant and it's not
of significant interest because it'll also have the downside of
requiring larger clear-page copy-page in page faults which is a
potentially negative effect. The first factor consists in taking a
single page fault for each 2M virtual region touched by userland (so
reducing the enter/exit kernel frequency by a 512 times factor). This
only matters the first time the memory is accessed for the lifetime of
a memory mapping. The second long lasting and much more important
factor will affect all subsequent accesses to the memory for the whole
runtime of the application. The second factor consist of two
components: 1) the TLB miss will run faster (especially with
virtualization using nested pagetables but almost always also on bare
metal without virtualization) and 2) a single TLB entry will be
mapping a much larger amount of virtual memory in turn reducing the
number of TLB misses. With virtualization and nested pagetables the
TLB can be mapped of larger size only if both KVM and the Linux guest
are using hugepages but a significant speedup already happens if only
one of the two is using hugepages just because of the fact the TLB
miss is going to run faster.

== Design ==

- "graceful fallback": mm components which don't have transparent
  hugepage knowledge fall back to breaking a transparent hugepage and
  working on the regular pages and their respective regular pmd/pte
  mappings

- if a hugepage allocation fails because of memory fragmentation,
  regular pages should be gracefully allocated instead and mixed in
  the same vma without any failure or significant delay and without
  userland noticing

- if some task quits and more hugepages become available (either
  immediately in the buddy or through the VM), guest physical memory
  backed by regular pages should be relocated on hugepages
  automatically (with khugepaged)

- it doesn't require memory reservation and in turn it uses hugepages
  whenever possible (the only possible reservation here is kernelcore=
  to avoid unmovable pages to fragment all the memory but such a tweak
  is not specific to transparent hugepage support and it's a generic
  feature that applies to all dynamic high order allocations in the
  kernel)

- this initial support only offers the feature in the anonymous memory
  regions but it'd be ideal to move it to tmpfs and the pagecache
  later

Transparent Hugepage Support maximizes the usefulness of free memory
if compared to the reservation approach of hugetlbfs by allowing all
unused memory to be used as cache or other movable (or even unmovable
entities). It doesn't require reservation to prevent hugepage
allocation failures to be noticeable from userland. It allows paging
and all other advanced VM features to be available on the
hugepages. It requires no modifications for applications to take
advantage of it.

Applications however can be further optimized to take advantage of
this feature, like for example they've been optimized before to avoid
a flood of mmap system calls for every malloc(4k). Optimizing userland
is by far not mandatory and khugepaged already can take care of long
lived page allocations even for hugepage unaware applications that
deals with large amounts of memory.

In certain cases when hugepages are enabled system wide, application
may end up allocating more memory resources. An application may mmap a
large region but only touch 1 byte of it, in that case a 2M page might
be allocated instead of a 4k page for no good. This is why it's
possible to disable hugepages system-wide and to only have them inside
MADV_HUGEPAGE madvise regions.

Embedded systems should enable hugepages only inside madvise regions
to eliminate any risk of wasting any precious byte of memory and to
only run faster.

Applications that gets a lot of benefit from hugepages and that don't
risk to lose memory by using hugepages, should use
madvise(MADV_HUGEPAGE) on their critical mmapped regions.

== sysfs ==

Transparent Hugepage Support can be entirely disabled (mostly for
debugging purposes) or only enabled inside MADV_HUGEPAGE regions (to
avoid the risk of consuming more memory resources) or enabled system
wide. This can be achieved with one of:

echo always >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled
echo madvise >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled
echo never >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled

It's also possible to limit defrag efforts in the VM to generate
hugepages in case they're not immediately free to madvise regions or
to never try to defrag memory and simply fallback to regular pages
unless hugepages are immediately available. Clearly if we spend CPU
time to defrag memory, we would expect to gain even more by the fact
we use hugepages later instead of regular pages. This isn't always
guaranteed, but it may be more likely in case the allocation is for a
MADV_HUGEPAGE region.

echo always >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/defrag
echo madvise >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/defrag
echo never >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/defrag

khugepaged will be automatically started when
transparent_hugepage/enabled is set to "always" or "madvise, and it'll
be automatically shutdown if it's set to "never".

khugepaged runs usually at low frequency so while one may not want to
invoke defrag algorithms synchronously during the page faults, it
should be worth invoking defrag at least in khugepaged. However it's
also possible to disable defrag in khugepaged:

echo yes >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/defrag
echo no >/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/defrag

You can also control how many pages khugepaged should scan at each
pass:

/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/pages_to_scan

and how many milliseconds to wait in khugepaged between each pass (you
can set this to 0 to run khugepaged at 100% utilization of one core):

/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/scan_sleep_millisecs

and how many milliseconds to wait in khugepaged if there's an hugepage
allocation failure to throttle the next allocation attempt.

/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/alloc_sleep_millisecs

The khugepaged progress can be seen in the number of pages collapsed:

/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/pages_collapsed

for each pass:

/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/full_scans

== Boot parameter ==

You can change the sysfs boot time defaults of Transparent Hugepage
Support by passing the parameter "transparent_hugepage=always" or
"transparent_hugepage=madvise" or "transparent_hugepage=never"
(without "") to the kernel command line.

== Need of application restart ==

The transparent_hugepage/enabled values only affect future
behavior. So to make them effective you need to restart any
application that could have been using hugepages. This also applies to
the regions registered in khugepaged.

== get_user_pages and follow_page ==

get_user_pages and follow_page if run on a hugepage, will return the
head or tail pages as usual (exactly as they would do on
hugetlbfs). Most gup users will only care about the actual physical
address of the page and its temporary pinning to release after the I/O
is complete, so they won't ever notice the fact the page is huge. But
if any driver is going to mangle over the page structure of the tail
page (like for checking page->mapping or other bits that are relevant
for the head page and not the tail page), it should be updated to jump
to check head page instead (while serializing properly against
split_huge_page() to avoid the head and tail pages to disappear from
under it, see the futex code to see an example of that, hugetlbfs also
needed special handling in futex code for similar reasons).

NOTE: these aren't new constraints to the GUP API, and they match the
same constrains that applies to hugetlbfs too, so any driver capable
of handling GUP on hugetlbfs will also work fine on transparent
hugepage backed mappings.

In case you can't handle compound pages if they're returned by
follow_page, the FOLL_SPLIT bit can be specified as parameter to
follow_page, so that it will split the hugepages before returning
them. Migration for example passes FOLL_SPLIT as parameter to
follow_page because it's not hugepage aware and in fact it can't work
at all on hugetlbfs (but it instead works fine on transparent
hugepages thanks to FOLL_SPLIT). migration simply can't deal with
hugepages being returned (as it's not only checking the pfn of the
page and pinning it during the copy but it pretends to migrate the
memory in regular page sizes and with regular pte/pmd mappings).

== Optimizing the applications ==

To be guaranteed that the kernel will map a 2M page immediately in any
memory region, the mmap region has to be hugepage naturally
aligned. posix_memalign() can provide that guarantee.

== Hugetlbfs ==

You can use hugetlbfs on a kernel that has transparent hugepage
support enabled just fine as always. No difference can be noted in
hugetlbfs other than there will be less overall fragmentation. All
usual features belonging to hugetlbfs are preserved and
unaffected. libhugetlbfs will also work fine as usual.

== Graceful fallback ==

Code walking pagetables but unware about huge pmds can simply call
split_huge_page_pmd(mm, pmd) where the pmd is the one returned by
pmd_offset. It's trivial to make the code transparent hugepage aware
by just grepping for "pmd_offset" and adding split_huge_page_pmd where
missing after pmd_offset returns the pmd. Thanks to the graceful
fallback design, with a one liner change, you can avoid to write
hundred if not thousand of lines of complex code to make your code
hugepage aware.

If you're not walking pagetables but you run into a physical hugepage
but you can't handle it natively in your code, you can split it by
calling split_huge_page(page). This is what the Linux VM does before
it tries to swapout the hugepage for example.

Example to make mremap.c transparent hugepage aware with a one liner
change:

diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c
--- a/mm/mremap.c
+++ b/mm/mremap.c
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ static pmd_t *get_old_pmd(struct mm_stru
 		return NULL;
 
 	pmd = pmd_offset(pud, addr);
+	split_huge_page_pmd(mm, pmd);
 	if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad(pmd))
 		return NULL;

== Locking in hugepage aware code ==

We want as much code as possible hugepage aware, as calling
split_huge_page() or split_huge_page_pmd() has a cost.

To make pagetable walks huge pmd aware, all you need to do is to call
pmd_trans_huge() on the pmd returned by pmd_offset. You must hold the
mmap_sem in read (or write) mode to be sure an huge pmd cannot be
created from under you by khugepaged (khugepaged collapse_huge_page
takes the mmap_sem in write mode in addition to the anon_vma lock). If
pmd_trans_huge returns false, you just fallback in the old code
paths. If instead pmd_trans_huge returns true, you have to take the
mm->page_table_lock and re-run pmd_trans_huge. Taking the
page_table_lock will prevent the huge pmd to be converted into a
regular pmd from under you (split_huge_page can run in parallel to the
pagetable walk). If the second pmd_trans_huge returns false, you
should just drop the page_table_lock and fallback to the old code as
before. Otherwise you should run pmd_trans_splitting on the pmd. In
case pmd_trans_splitting returns true, it means split_huge_page is
already in the middle of splitting the page. So if pmd_trans_splitting
returns true it's enough to drop the page_table_lock and call
wait_split_huge_page and then fallback the old code paths. You are
guaranteed by the time wait_split_huge_page returns, the pmd isn't
huge anymore. If pmd_trans_splitting returns false, you can proceed to
process the huge pmd and the hugepage natively. Once finished you can
drop the page_table_lock.

== compound_lock, get_user_pages and put_page ==

split_huge_page internally has to distribute the refcounts in the head
page to the tail pages before clearing all PG_head/tail bits from the
page structures. It can do that easily for refcounts taken by huge pmd
mappings. But the GUI API as created by hugetlbfs (that returns head
and tail pages if running get_user_pages on an address backed by any
hugepage), requires the refcount to be accounted on the tail pages and
not only in the head pages, if we want to be able to run
split_huge_page while there are gup pins established on any tail
page. Failure to be able to run split_huge_page if there's any gup pin
on any tail page, would mean having to split all hugepages upfront in
get_user_pages which is unacceptable as too many gup users are
performance critical and they must work natively on hugepages like
they work natively on hugetlbfs already (hugetlbfs is simpler because
hugetlbfs pages cannot be splitted so there wouldn't be requirement of
accounting the pins on the tail pages for hugetlbfs). If we wouldn't
account the gup refcounts on the tail pages during gup, we won't know
anymore which tail page is pinned by gup and which is not while we run
split_huge_page. But we still have to add the gup pin to the head page
too, to know when we can free the compound page in case it's never
splitted during its lifetime. That requires changing not just
get_page, but put_page as well so that when put_page runs on a tail
page (and only on a tail page) it will find its respective head page,
and then it will decrease the head page refcount in addition to the
tail page refcount. To obtain a head page reliably and to decrease its
refcount without race conditions, put_page has to serialize against
__split_huge_page_refcount using a special per-page lock called
compound_lock.
--
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