[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f2fb6cc5-ff95-ca51-b377-5e4bd239d5e8@kernel.dk>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 07:50:45 -0700
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] iov_iter: Improve page extraction (pin or just list)
On 1/31/23 6:48?AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 31.01.23 14:41, David Howells wrote:
>> David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> percpu counters maybe - add them up at the point of viewing?
>>>> They are percpu, see my last email. But for every 108 changes (on
>>>> my system), they will do two atomic_long_adds(). So not very
>>>> useful for anything but low frequency modifications.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can we just treat the whole acquired/released accounting as a debug mechanism
>>> to detect missing releases and do it only for debug kernels?
>>>
>>>
>>> The pcpu counter is an s8, so we have to flush on a regular basis and cannot
>>> really defer it any longer ... but I'm curious if it would be of any help to
>>> only have a single PINNED counter that goes into both directions (inc/dec on
>>> pin/release), to reduce the flushing.
>>>
>>> Of course, once we pin/release more than ~108 pages in one go or we switch
>>> CPUs frequently it won't be that much of a help ...
>>
>> What are the stats actually used for? Is it just debugging, or do we actually
>> have users for them (control groups spring to mind)?
>
> As it's really just "how many pinning events" vs. "how many unpinning
> events", I assume it's only for debugging.
>
> For example, if you pin the same page twice it would not get accounted
> as "a single page is pinned".
How about something like the below then? I can send it out as a real
patch, will run a sanity check on it first but would be surprised if
this doesn't fix it.
diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
index f45a3a5be53a..41abb16286ec 100644
--- a/mm/gup.c
+++ b/mm/gup.c
@@ -168,7 +168,9 @@ struct folio *try_grab_folio(struct page *page, int refs, unsigned int flags)
*/
smp_mb__after_atomic();
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
node_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_FOLL_PIN_ACQUIRED, refs);
+#endif
return folio;
}
@@ -180,7 +182,9 @@ struct folio *try_grab_folio(struct page *page, int refs, unsigned int flags)
static void gup_put_folio(struct folio *folio, int refs, unsigned int flags)
{
if (flags & FOLL_PIN) {
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
node_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_FOLL_PIN_RELEASED, refs);
+#endif
if (folio_test_large(folio))
atomic_sub(refs, folio_pincount_ptr(folio));
else
@@ -236,8 +240,9 @@ int __must_check try_grab_page(struct page *page, unsigned int flags)
} else {
folio_ref_add(folio, GUP_PIN_COUNTING_BIAS);
}
-
+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
node_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_FOLL_PIN_ACQUIRED, 1);
+#endif
}
return 0;
--
Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists