[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <71350398-b5d8-45b9-b05c-d2b63030f766@lucifer.local>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 14:11:07 +0100
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...hat.com, ziy@...dia.com,
baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
npache@...hat.com, ryan.roberts@....com, baohua@...nel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] khugepaged: Optimize collapse_pte_mapped_thp()
for large folios by PTE batching
On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 11:28:05AM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
> Use PTE batching to optimize collapse_pte_mapped_thp().
>
> On arm64, suppose khugepaged is scanning a pte-mapped 2MB THP for collapse.
> Then, calling ptep_clear() for every pte will cause a TLB flush for every
> contpte block. Instead, clear_full_ptes() does a
> contpte_try_unfold_partial() which will flush the TLB only for the (if any)
> starting and ending contpte block, if they partially overlap with the range
> khugepaged is looking at.
>
> For all arches, there should be a benefit due to batching atomic operations
> on mapcounts due to folio_remove_rmap_ptes().
>
> Note that we do not need to make a change to the check
> "if (folio_page(folio, i) != page)"; if i'th page of the folio is equal
> to the first page of our batch, then i + 1, .... i + nr_batch_ptes - 1
> pages of the folio will be equal to the corresponding pages of our
> batch mapping consecutive pages.
>
> No issues were observed with mm-selftests.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
> ---
> mm/khugepaged.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/khugepaged.c b/mm/khugepaged.c
> index 3944b112d452..4c8d33abfbd8 100644
> --- a/mm/khugepaged.c
> +++ b/mm/khugepaged.c
> @@ -1499,15 +1499,16 @@ static int set_huge_pmd(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
> int collapse_pte_mapped_thp(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> bool install_pmd)
> {
> + int nr_mapped_ptes = 0, nr_batch_ptes, result = SCAN_FAIL;
> struct mmu_notifier_range range;
> bool notified = false;
> unsigned long haddr = addr & HPAGE_PMD_MASK;
> + unsigned long end = haddr + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE;
> struct vm_area_struct *vma = vma_lookup(mm, haddr);
> struct folio *folio;
> pte_t *start_pte, *pte;
> pmd_t *pmd, pgt_pmd;
> spinlock_t *pml = NULL, *ptl;
> - int nr_ptes = 0, result = SCAN_FAIL;
> int i;
>
> mmap_assert_locked(mm);
> @@ -1621,11 +1622,17 @@ int collapse_pte_mapped_thp(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> goto abort;
>
> /* step 2: clear page table and adjust rmap */
> - for (i = 0, addr = haddr, pte = start_pte;
> - i < HPAGE_PMD_NR; i++, addr += PAGE_SIZE, pte++) {
> + for (i = 0, addr = haddr, pte = start_pte; i < HPAGE_PMD_NR;
> + i += nr_batch_ptes, addr += nr_batch_ptes * PAGE_SIZE,
> + pte += nr_batch_ptes) {
> + const fpb_t flags = FPB_IGNORE_DIRTY | FPB_IGNORE_SOFT_DIRTY;
> + int max_nr_batch_ptes = (end - addr) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> + struct folio *mapped_folio;
> struct page *page;
> pte_t ptent = ptep_get(pte);
>
> + nr_batch_ptes = 1;
> +
> if (pte_none(ptent))
> continue;
> /*
> @@ -1639,26 +1646,33 @@ int collapse_pte_mapped_thp(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> goto abort;
> }
> page = vm_normal_page(vma, addr, ptent);
> + mapped_folio = page_folio(page);
> +
> if (folio_page(folio, i) != page)
> goto abort;
Isn't this asserting that folio == mapped_folio here? We're saying page is the
ith page of folio, so why do we need to look up mapped_folio?
>
> + mapped_folio = page_folio(page);
You're assigning this twice.
> + nr_batch_ptes = folio_pte_batch(mapped_folio, addr, pte, ptent,
> + max_nr_batch_ptes, flags,
> + NULL, NULL, NULL);
> +
> /*
> * Must clear entry, or a racing truncate may re-remove it.
> * TLB flush can be left until pmdp_collapse_flush() does it.
> * PTE dirty? Shmem page is already dirty; file is read-only.
> */
> - ptep_clear(mm, addr, pte);
> - folio_remove_rmap_pte(folio, page, vma);
> - nr_ptes++;
> + clear_full_ptes(mm, addr, pte, nr_batch_ptes, /* full = */ false);
> + folio_remove_rmap_ptes(folio, page, nr_batch_ptes, vma);
> + nr_mapped_ptes += nr_batch_ptes;
> }
>
> if (!pml)
> spin_unlock(ptl);
>
> /* step 3: set proper refcount and mm_counters. */
> - if (nr_ptes) {
> - folio_ref_sub(folio, nr_ptes);
> - add_mm_counter(mm, mm_counter_file(folio), -nr_ptes);
> + if (nr_mapped_ptes) {
> + folio_ref_sub(folio, nr_mapped_ptes);
> + add_mm_counter(mm, mm_counter_file(folio), -nr_mapped_ptes);
> }
>
> /* step 4: remove empty page table */
> @@ -1691,10 +1705,10 @@ int collapse_pte_mapped_thp(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> : SCAN_SUCCEED;
> goto drop_folio;
> abort:
> - if (nr_ptes) {
> + if (nr_mapped_ptes) {
I know it's ironic coming from me :P but I'm not sure why we need to churn this
up by renaming?
> flush_tlb_mm(mm);
> - folio_ref_sub(folio, nr_ptes);
> - add_mm_counter(mm, mm_counter_file(folio), -nr_ptes);
> + folio_ref_sub(folio, nr_mapped_ptes);
> + add_mm_counter(mm, mm_counter_file(folio), -nr_mapped_ptes);
> }
> unlock:
> if (start_pte)
> --
> 2.30.2
>
V
Powered by blists - more mailing lists