| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <c9f425fd-285b-46b6-821e-fb758a4101e0@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 11:38:48 +0100
From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
To: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, cerasuolodomenico@...il.com,
chrisl@...nel.org, corbet@....net, david@...hat.com, kasong@...cent.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, peterx@...hat.com,
surenb@...gle.com, v-songbaohua@...o.com, willy@...radead.org,
yosryahmed@...gle.com, yuzhao@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] mm: add per-order mTHP anon_fault_alloc and
anon_fault_fallback counters
On 12/04/2024 11:29, Barry Song wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 10:25 PM Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/04/2024 11:17, Barry Song wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 9:56 PM Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 12/04/2024 10:43, Barry Song wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 9:27 PM Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Barry,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2 remaining comments - otherwise looks good. (same comments I just made in the
>>>>>> v4 conversation).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/04/2024 08:37, Barry Song wrote:
>>>>>>> From: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Profiling a system blindly with mTHP has become challenging due to the
>>>>>>> lack of visibility into its operations. Presenting the success rate of
>>>>>>> mTHP allocations appears to be pressing need.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Recently, I've been experiencing significant difficulty debugging
>>>>>>> performance improvements and regressions without these figures. It's
>>>>>>> crucial for us to understand the true effectiveness of mTHP in real-world
>>>>>>> scenarios, especially in systems with fragmented memory.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This patch establishes the framework for per-order mTHP
>>>>>>> counters. It begins by introducing the anon_fault_alloc and
>>>>>>> anon_fault_fallback counters. Additionally, to maintain consistency
>>>>>>> with thp_fault_fallback_charge in /proc/vmstat, this patch also tracks
>>>>>>> anon_fault_fallback_charge when mem_cgroup_charge fails for mTHP.
>>>>>>> Incorporating additional counters should now be straightforward as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>
>>>>>>> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Domenico Cerasuolo <cerasuolodomenico@...il.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Kairui Song <kasong@...cent.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@...radead.org>
>>>>>>> Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> include/linux/huge_mm.h | 51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>> mm/huge_memory.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>> mm/memory.c | 3 ++
>>>>>>> mm/page_alloc.c | 4 +++
>>>>>>> 4 files changed, 119 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/huge_mm.h b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>>>>>> index e896ca4760f6..c5beb54b97cb 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>>>>>> @@ -264,6 +264,57 @@ unsigned long thp_vma_allowable_orders(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>>>>>> enforce_sysfs, orders);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +enum mthp_stat_item {
>>>>>>> + MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_ALLOC,
>>>>>>> + MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_FALLBACK,
>>>>>>> + MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_FALLBACK_CHARGE,
>>>>>>> + __MTHP_STAT_COUNT
>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +struct mthp_stat {
>>>>>>> + unsigned long stats[0][__MTHP_STAT_COUNT];
>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +extern struct mthp_stat __percpu *mthp_stats;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +static inline void count_mthp_stat(int order, enum mthp_stat_item item)
>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>> + if (order <= 0 || order > PMD_ORDER || !mthp_stats)
>>>>>>> + return;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + this_cpu_inc(mthp_stats->stats[order][item]);
>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +static inline void count_mthp_stats(int order, enum mthp_stat_item item, long delta)
>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>> + if (order <= 0 || order > PMD_ORDER || !mthp_stats)
>>>>>>> + return;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + this_cpu_add(mthp_stats->stats[order][item], delta);
>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>>> + * Fold the foreign cpu mthp stats into our own.
>>>>>>> + *
>>>>>>> + * This is adding to the stats on one processor
>>>>>>> + * but keeps the global counts constant.
>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>> +static inline void mthp_stats_fold_cpu(int cpu)
>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>> + struct mthp_stat *fold_stat;
>>>>>>> + int i, j;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + if (!mthp_stats)
>>>>>>> + return;
>>>>>>> + fold_stat = per_cpu_ptr(mthp_stats, cpu);
>>>>>>> + for (i = 1; i <= PMD_ORDER; i++) {
>>>>>>> + for (j = 0; j < __MTHP_STAT_COUNT; j++) {
>>>>>>> + count_mthp_stats(i, j, fold_stat->stats[i][j]);
>>>>>>> + fold_stat->stats[i][j] = 0;
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a pretty horrible hack; I'm pretty sure just summing for all *possible*
>>>>>> cpus should work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> #define transparent_hugepage_use_zero_page() \
>>>>>>> (transparent_hugepage_flags & \
>>>>>>> (1<<TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_USE_ZERO_PAGE_FLAG))
>>>>>>> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>>>>>> index dc30139590e6..21c4ac74b484 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>>>>>> @@ -526,6 +526,50 @@ static const struct kobj_type thpsize_ktype = {
>>>>>>> .sysfs_ops = &kobj_sysfs_ops,
>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +struct mthp_stat __percpu *mthp_stats;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +static unsigned long sum_mthp_stat(int order, enum mthp_stat_item item)
>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>> + unsigned long sum = 0;
>>>>>>> + int cpu;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + cpus_read_lock();
>>>>>>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>>>>>> + struct mthp_stat *this = per_cpu_ptr(mthp_stats, cpu);
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + sum += this->stats[order][item];
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> + cpus_read_unlock();
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + return sum;
>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +#define DEFINE_MTHP_STAT_ATTR(_name, _index) \
>>>>>>> +static ssize_t _name##_show(struct kobject *kobj, \
>>>>>>> + struct kobj_attribute *attr, char *buf) \
>>>>>>> +{ \
>>>>>>> + int order = to_thpsize(kobj)->order; \
>>>>>>> + \
>>>>>>> + return sysfs_emit(buf, "%lu\n", sum_mthp_stat(order, _index)); \
>>>>>>> +} \
>>>>>>> +static struct kobj_attribute _name##_attr = __ATTR_RO(_name)
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +DEFINE_MTHP_STAT_ATTR(anon_fault_alloc, MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_ALLOC);
>>>>>>> +DEFINE_MTHP_STAT_ATTR(anon_fault_fallback, MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_FALLBACK);
>>>>>>> +DEFINE_MTHP_STAT_ATTR(anon_fault_fallback_charge, MTHP_STAT_ANON_FAULT_FALLBACK_CHARGE);
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +static struct attribute *stats_attrs[] = {
>>>>>>> + &anon_fault_alloc_attr.attr,
>>>>>>> + &anon_fault_fallback_attr.attr,
>>>>>>> + &anon_fault_fallback_charge_attr.attr,
>>>>>>> + NULL,
>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +static struct attribute_group stats_attr_group = {
>>>>>>> + .name = "stats",
>>>>>>> + .attrs = stats_attrs,
>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> static struct thpsize *thpsize_create(int order, struct kobject *parent)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> unsigned long size = (PAGE_SIZE << order) / SZ_1K;
>>>>>>> @@ -549,6 +593,12 @@ static struct thpsize *thpsize_create(int order, struct kobject *parent)
>>>>>>> return ERR_PTR(ret);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + ret = sysfs_create_group(&thpsize->kobj, &stats_attr_group);
>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>>> + kobject_put(&thpsize->kobj);
>>>>>>> + return ERR_PTR(ret);
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> thpsize->order = order;
>>>>>>> return thpsize;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> @@ -691,6 +741,11 @@ static int __init hugepage_init(void)
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>> MAYBE_BUILD_BUG_ON(HPAGE_PMD_ORDER < 2);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + mthp_stats = __alloc_percpu((PMD_ORDER + 1) * sizeof(mthp_stats->stats[0]),
>>>>>>> + sizeof(unsigned long));
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally I think it would be cleaner to allocate statically using
>>>>>> ilog2(MAX_PTRS_PER_PTE) instead of PMD_ORDER.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ryan,
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't understand why MAX_PTRS_PER_PTE is the correct size. For ARM64,
>>>>>
>>>>> #define PMD_ORDER (PMD_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
>>>>>
>>>>> #define MAX_PTRS_PER_PTE PTRS_PER_PTE
>>>>>
>>>>> #define PTRS_PER_PTE (1 << (PAGE_SHIFT - 3))
>>>>>
>>>>> while PAGE_SIZE is 16KiB or 64KiB, PTRS_PER_PTE can be a huge number?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am I missing something?
>>>>
>>>> PTRS_PER_PTE is the number of PTE entries in a PTE table. On arm64 its as follows:
>>>>
>>>> PAGE_SIZE PAGE_SHIFT PTRS_PER_PTE
>>>> 4K 12 512
>>>> 16K 14 2048
>>>> 64K 16 8192
>>>>
>>>> So (PTRS_PER_PTE * PAGE_SIZE) = PMD_SIZE
>>>>
>>>> PMD_ORDER is ilog2(PMD_SIZE / PAGE_SIZE) = ilog2(PTRS_PER_PTE)
>>>>
>>>> MAX_PTRS_PER_PTE is just the maximum value that PTRS_PER_PTE will ever have,
>>>> (and its equal to PTRS_PER_PTE except for powerpc).
>>>>
>>>> Pretty sure the math is correct?
>>>
>>> I am not convinced the math is correct :-)
>>>
>>> while page size is 64KiB, the page table is as below,
>>> PMD_ORDER = L2 index bits = [41:29] = 13 != ilog2(8192)
>>
>> 1 << 13 = 8192
>>
>> Right? So:
>>
>> ilog2(8192) = 13
>>
>> What's wrong with that?
>>
>> I even checked in Python to make sure I'm not going mad:
>>
>>>>> import math
>>>>> math.log2(8192)
>> 13.0
>
> You're correct. My mind fixated on the '16' in the line '64K 16 8192'.
> I mistakenly thought ilog2(8192) equals 16. Apologies for the confusion.
No worries! We got there in the end :)
Of course my suggestion relies on being able to get a compile-time constant from
ilog2(MAX_PTRS_PER_PTE). I think that should work, right?
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> +--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
>>> |63 56|55 48|47 40|39 32|31 24|23 16|15 8|7 0|
>>> +--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
>>> | | | | |
>>> | | | | v
>>> | | | | [15:0] in-page offset
>>> | | | +----------> [28:16] L3 index
>>> | | +--------------------------> [41:29] L2 index
>>> | +-------------------------------> [47:42] L1 index (48-bit)
>>> | [51:42] L1 index (52-bit)
>>> +-------------------------------------------------> [63] TTBR0/1
>>>
>>> while page size is 4KiB, the page table is as below,
>>>
>>> +--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
>>> |63 56|55 48|47 40|39 32|31 24|23 16|15 8|7 0|
>>> +--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
>>> | | | | | |
>>> | | | | | v
>>> | | | | | [11:0] in-page offset
>>> | | | | +-> [20:12] L3 index
>>> | | | +-----------> [29:21] L2 index
>>> | | +---------------------> [38:30] L1 index
>>> | +-------------------------------> [47:39] L0 index
>>> +-------------------------------------------------> [63] TTBR0/1
>>>
>>> PMD_ORDER = L2 index bits = [29:21] = 9 = ilog2(512).
>>>
>>> You are only correct while page size = 4KiB.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists