[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aMrxacOJMsTY9O2n@hyeyoo>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 02:35:37 +0900
From: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>
To: alexjlzheng@...il.com
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, jroedel@...e.de,
linux@...linux.org.uk, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
david@...hat.com, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
vbabka@...e.cz, rppt@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com,
urezki@...il.com, arnd@...db.de, vincenzo.frascino@....com,
geert@...ux-m68k.org, thuth@...hat.com, kas@...nel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, joro@...tes.org,
Jinliang Zheng <alexjlzheng@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: introduce ARCH_PAGE_TABLE_SYNC_MASK_VMALLOC to sync
kernel mapping conditionally
On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 01:41:04AM +0900, Harry Yoo wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 11:48:29PM +0800, alexjlzheng@...il.com wrote:
> > From: Jinliang Zheng <alexjlzheng@...cent.com>
> >
> > After commit 6eb82f994026 ("x86/mm: Pre-allocate P4D/PUD pages for
> > vmalloc area"), we don't need to synchronize kernel mappings in the
> > vmalloc area on x86_64.
>
> Right.
>
> > And commit 58a18fe95e83 ("x86/mm/64: Do not sync vmalloc/ioremap
> > mappings") actually does this.
>
> Right.
>
> > But commit 6659d0279980 ("x86/mm/64: define ARCH_PAGE_TABLE_SYNC_MASK
> > and arch_sync_kernel_mappings()") breaks this.
>
> Good point.
>
> > This patch introduces ARCH_PAGE_TABLE_SYNC_MASK_VMALLOC to avoid
> > unnecessary kernel mappings synchronization of the vmalloc area.
> >
> > Fixes: 6659d0279980 ("x86/mm/64: define ARCH_PAGE_TABLE_SYNC_MASK and arch_sync_kernel_mappings()")
>
> The commit is getting backported to -stable kernels.
Just to be clear, "the commit" I mentioned above was commit
6659d0279980 ("x86/mm/64: define ARCH_PAGE_TABLE_SYNC_MASK and
arch_sync_kernel_mappings()"), and I was not saying this patch is
going to be backported to -stable.
If you intend to backport it, the `Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org>` tag
is required to backport it to -stable kernels.
> Do you think this can cause a visible performance regression from
> user point of view, or it's just a nice optimization to have?
> (and any data to support?)
And that's why I was asking if you think this needs to be backported :)
> > Signed-off-by: Jinliang Zheng <alexjlzheng@...cent.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/include/asm/page.h | 3 ++-
> > arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable-2level_types.h | 3 ++-
> > arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable-3level_types.h | 3 ++-
> > include/linux/pgtable.h | 4 ++++
> > mm/memory.c | 2 +-
> > mm/vmalloc.c | 6 +++---
> > 6 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> > index 0ba4f6b71847..cd2488043f8f 100644
> > --- a/mm/memory.c
> > +++ b/mm/memory.c
> > @@ -3170,7 +3170,7 @@ static int __apply_to_page_range(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> > break;
> > } while (pgd++, addr = next, addr != end);
> >
> > - if (mask & ARCH_PAGE_TABLE_SYNC_MASK)
> > + if (mask & ARCH_PAGE_TABLE_SYNC_MASK_VMALLOC)
> > arch_sync_kernel_mappings(start, start + size);
>
> But vmalloc is not the only user of apply_to_page_range()?
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Harry / Hyeonggon
--
Cheers,
Harry / Hyeonggon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists