[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <IA0PR11MB71851ED7AF1E49597B15F0B9F85CA@IA0PR11MB7185.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 06:23:31 +0000
From: "Kasireddy, Vivek" <vivek.kasireddy@...el.com>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
CC: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
James Houghton <jthoughton@...gle.com>,
"Chang, Junxiao" <junxiao.chang@...el.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"Hocko, Michal" <mhocko@...e.com>,
"jmarchan@...hat.com" <jmarchan@...hat.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"muchun.song@...ux.dev" <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
"Kim, Dongwon" <dongwon.kim@...el.com>,
"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] mm: fix hugetlb page unmap count balance issue
Hi Gerd,
>
> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 10:04:42AM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> > On 05/12/23 16:29, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> > > On 05/12/23 14:26, James Houghton wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 12:20 AM Junxiao Chang
> <junxiao.chang@...el.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This alone doesn't fix mapcounting for PTE-mapped HugeTLB pages.
> You
> > > > need something like [1]. I can resend it if that's what we should be
> > > > doing, but this mapcounting scheme doesn't work when the page
> structs
> > > > have been freed.
> > > >
> > > > It seems like it was a mistake to include support for hugetlb memfds in
> udmabuf.
> > >
> > > IIUC, it was added with commit 16c243e99d33 udmabuf: Add support for
> mapping
> > > hugepages (v4). Looks like it was never sent to linux-mm? That is
> unfortunate
> > > as hugetlb vmemmap freeing went in at about the same time. And, as
> you have
> > > noted udmabuf will not work if hugetlb vmemmap freeing is enabled.
> > >
> > > Sigh!
> > >
> > > Trying to think of a way forward.
> > > --
> > > Mike Kravetz
> > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20230306230004.1387007-2-
> jthoughton@...gle.com/
> > > >
> > > > - James
> >
> > Adding people and list on Cc: involved with commit 16c243e99d33.
> >
> > There are several issues with trying to map tail pages of hugetllb pages
> > not taken into account with udmabuf. James spent quite a bit of time
> trying
> > to understand and address all the issues with the HGM code. While using
> > the scheme proposed by James, may be an approach to the mapcount
> issue there
> > are also other issues that need attention. For example, I do not see how
> > the fault code checks the state of the hugetlb page (such as poison) as none
> > of that state is carried in tail pages.
> >
> > The more I think about it, the more I think udmabuf should treat hugetlb
> > pages as hugetlb pages. They should be mapped at the appropriate level
> > in the page table. Of course, this would impose new restrictions on the
> > API (mmap and ioctl) that may break existing users. I have no idea how
> > extensively udmabuf is being used with hugetlb mappings.
>
> User of this is qemu. It can use the udmabuf driver to create host
> dma-bufs for guest resources (virtio-gpu buffers), to avoid copying
> data when showing the guest display in a host window.
>
> hugetlb support is needed in case qemu guest memory is backed by
> hugetlbfs. That does not imply the virtio-gpu buffers are hugepage
> aligned though, udmabuf would still need to operate on smaller chunks
> of memory. So with additional restrictions this will not work any
> more for qemu. I'd suggest to just revert hugetlb support instead
> and go back to the drawing board.
>
> Also not sure why hugetlbfs is used for guest memory in the first place.
> It used to be a thing years ago, but with the arrival of transparent
> hugepages there is as far I know little reason to still use hugetlbfs.
The main reason why we are interested in using hugetlbfs for guest memory
is because we observed non-trivial performance improvement while running
certain 3D heavy workloads in the guest. And, we noticed this by only
switching the Guest memory backend to include hugepages (i.e, hugetlb=on)
and with no other changes.
To address the current situation, I am readying a patch for udmabuf driver that
would add back support for mapping hugepages but without making use of
the subpages directly.
Thanks,
Vivek
>
> Vivek? Dongwon?
>
> take care,
> Gerd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists