[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c388562f-cb00-40bb-9ec1-ec07976771c4@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 15:02:54 +0800
From: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hughd@...gle.com, david@...hat.com,
Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, npache@...hat.com, ryan.roberts@....com,
dev.jain@....com, ziy@...dia.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: shmem: disallow hugepages if the system-wide
shmem THP sysfs settings are disabled
On 2025/6/9 23:33, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> OK overall the logic looks good now I realise the mistake I made is that
> the thp_vma_allowable_orders() check is for the vma_is_anonymous() case
> only.
>
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 02:31:46PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2025/6/7 20:14, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 05, 2025 at 04:00:59PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
>>>> The MADV_COLLAPSE will ignore the system-wide shmem THP sysfs settings, which
>>>> means that even though we have disabled the shmem THP configuration, MADV_COLLAPSE
>>>> will still attempt to collapse into a shmem THP. This violates the rule we have
>>>> agreed upon: never means never.
>>>
>>> Ugh that we have separate shmem logic. And split between huge_memory.c and
>>> shmem.c too :)) Again, not your fault, just a general moan about existing
>>> stuff :P
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Another rule for madvise, referring to David's suggestion: “allowing for collapsing
>>>> in a VM without VM_HUGEPAGE in the "madvise" mode would be fine".
>>>
>>> Hm I'm not sure if this is enforced is it? I may have missed something here
>>> however.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then the current strategy is:
>>>>
>>>> For shmem, if none of always, madvise, within_size, and inherit have enabled
>>>> PMD-sized THP, then MADV_COLLAPSE will be prohibited from collapsing PMD-sized THP.
>>>
>>> Again, is this just MADV_COLLAPSE? Surely this is a general change?
>>>
>>> We should be clear that we are not explicitly limiting ourselves to
>>> MADV_COLLAPSE here.
>>>
>>> You shoudl clearly indicate that the MADV_COLLAPSE case DOESN'T set
>>> TVA_ENFORCE_SYSFS and that's the key difference here.
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>
> Thanks!
>
>>>> For tmpfs, if the mount option is set with the 'huge=never' parameter, then
>>>> MADV_COLLAPSE will be prohibited from collapsing PMD-sized THP.
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> mm/huge_memory.c | 2 +-
>>>> mm/shmem.c | 6 +++---
>>>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>>> index d3e66136e41a..a8cfa37cae72 100644
>>>> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>>> @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ unsigned long __thp_vma_allowable_orders(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>>> * own flags.
>>>> */
>>>> if (!in_pf && shmem_file(vma->vm_file))
>>>> - return shmem_allowable_huge_orders(file_inode(vma->vm_file),
>>>> + return orders & shmem_allowable_huge_orders(file_inode(vma->vm_file),
>>>> vma, vma->vm_pgoff, 0,
>>>> !enforce_sysfs);
>>>
>>> Did you mean to do &&?
>>
>> No. It might be worth having a separate fix patch here, because the original
>> logic is incorrect and needs to perform an '&' operation with ’orders‘.
>>
>> This change should be a general change.
>
> Ah yeah, I did think that _perhaps_ it could be. I think it would make
> sense to separate out into another patch albeit very small, just so we can
> separate your further changes from the fix for this.
OK.
>>> Also, is this achieving what you want to achieve? Is it necessary? The
>>> changes in patch 1/2 enforce the global settings and before this code in
>>> __thp_vma_allowable_orders():
>>>
>>> unsigned long __thp_vma_allowable_orders(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>> unsigned long vm_flags,
>>> unsigned long tva_flags,
>>> unsigned long orders)
>>> {
>>> ... (no early exits) ...
>>>
>>> orders &= supported_orders;
>>> if (!orders)
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> ...
>>> }
>>>
>>> So if orders == 0 due to the changes in thp_vma_allowable_orders(), which
>>> is the only caller of __thp_vma_allowable_orders() then we _always_ exit
>>> early here before we get to this shmem_allowable_huge_orders() code.
>>
>> Not for this case. Since shmem already supports mTHP, this is to check
>> whether the 'orders' are enabled in the shmem mTHP configuration. For
>> example, shmem mTHP might only enable 64K mTHP, which obviously does not
>> allow PMD-sized THP to collapse.
>
> Yeah sorry I get it now thp_vma_allowable_orders() does a
> vma_is_anonymous() predicate. Doh! :P
>
> God what a mess this is (not your fault, pre-existing obviously :P)
>
> Yeah le sigh.
>
>>
>>>> diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c
>>>> index 4b42419ce6b2..9af45d4e27e6 100644
>>>> --- a/mm/shmem.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/shmem.c
>>>> @@ -625,7 +625,7 @@ static unsigned int shmem_huge_global_enabled(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index
>>>> return 0;
>>>> if (shmem_huge == SHMEM_HUGE_DENY)
>>>> return 0;
>>>> - if (shmem_huge_force || shmem_huge == SHMEM_HUGE_FORCE)
>>>> + if (shmem_huge == SHMEM_HUGE_FORCE)
>>>> return maybe_pmd_order;
>
> OK I get it now, this means the !check sysfs doesn't just get
> actioned... :)
>
>>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> @@ -660,7 +660,7 @@ static unsigned int shmem_huge_global_enabled(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index
>>>>
>>>> fallthrough;
>>>> case SHMEM_HUGE_ADVISE:
>>>> - if (vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE)
>>>> + if (shmem_huge_force || (vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE))
>>>> return maybe_pmd_order;
>>>> fallthrough;
>>>> default:
>>>> @@ -1790,7 +1790,7 @@ unsigned long shmem_allowable_huge_orders(struct inode *inode,
>>>> /* Allow mTHP that will be fully within i_size. */
>>>> mask |= shmem_get_orders_within_size(inode, within_size_orders, index, 0);
>>>>
>>>> - if (vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE)
>>>> + if (shmem_huge_force || (vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE))
>>>> mask |= READ_ONCE(huge_shmem_orders_madvise);
>>>
>>> I'm also not sure these are necessary:
>>>
>>> The only path that can set shmem_huge_force is __thp_vma_allowable_orders()
>>> -> shmem_allowable_huge_orders() -> shmem_huge_global_enabled() and then
>>> only if !(tva_flags & TVA_ENFORCE_SYSFS) and as stated above we already
>>> cover off this case by early exiting __thp_vma_allowable_orders() if orders
>>> == 0 as established in patch 1/2.
>>
>> Not ture. Shmem has its own separate mTHP sysfs setting, which is different
>> from the mTHP sysfs setting for anonymous pages mentioned earlier. These
>> checks are in the shmem file. You can check more for shmem mTHP in
>> Documentation/admin-guide/mm/transhuge.rst :)
>
> Ah yeah the issue is if (vma_is_anonymous())... doh!
>
> The stack trace is correct though, this is the only place we do it:
>
> ~~
>
> static unsigned int shmem_huge_global_enabled(struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index,
> loff_t write_end, bool shmem_huge_force,
> struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> unsigned long vm_flags)
>
> Is called from shmem_getattr():
>
> if (shmem_huge_global_enabled(inode, 0, 0, false, NULL, 0))
> stat->blksize = HPAGE_PMD_SIZE;
>
> Note that smem_huge_force == false here
>
> And shmem_allowable_huge_orders():
>
> unsigned long shmem_allowable_huge_orders(struct inode *inode,
> struct vm_area_struct *vma, pgoff_t index,
> loff_t write_end, bool shmem_huge_force)
>
> global_orders = shmem_huge_global_enabled(inode, index, write_end,
> shmem_huge_force, vma, vm_flags);
>
> Which forwards 'shmem_huge_force'.
>
> In shmem_get_folow_gfp():
>
> orders = shmem_allowable_huge_orders(inode, vma, index, write_end, false);
>
> Note that shmem_huge_force == false.
>
> In __thp_vma_allowable_orders();
>
> unsigned long __thp_vma_allowable_orders(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> unsigned long vm_flags,
> unsigned long tva_flags,
> unsigned long orders)
> {
> ...
> bool enforce_sysfs = tva_flags & TVA_ENFORCE_SYSFS;
>
> ...
>
> if (!in_pf && shmem_file(vma->vm_file))
> return shmem_allowable_huge_orders(file_inode(vma->vm_file),
> vma, vma->vm_pgoff, 0,
> !enforce_sysfs);
>
> So we set shmem_huge_force only if TVA_ENFORCE_SYSFS is not set in tva_flags passed to __thp_vma_allowable_orders()
>
> The only caller of __thp_vma_allowable_orders() is thp_vma_allowable_orders().
Right :)
>
> But yeah we do need to do shmem things... sorry my mistake.
No worries. I appreciate your useful comments.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists