From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 053ECC61DF4 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 07:27:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229517AbjKXH1C (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:27:02 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44530 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230322AbjKXH05 (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:26:57 -0500 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.188]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 545FBD72 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2023 23:27:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from kwepemm000020.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.54]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Sc5zS46gSzSh7C; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:22:44 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.179.160] (10.174.179.160) by kwepemm000020.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.93) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:27:00 +0800 Message-ID: <20114aca-1857-7299-d94b-504ce5aff08c@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:26:59 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.0 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: filemap: avoid unnecessary major faults in filemap_fault() Content-Language: en-US To: "Huang, Ying" CC: Yin Fengwei , , , , , , , , , , References: <20231122140052.4092083-1-zhangpeng362@huawei.com> <801bd0c9-7d0c-4231-93e5-7532e8231756@intel.com> <48235d73-3dc6-263d-7822-6d479b753d46@huawei.com> <87y1en7pq3.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> From: "zhangpeng (AS)" In-Reply-To: <87y1en7pq3.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.179.160] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.182) To kwepemm000020.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.93) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2023/11/24 12:13, Huang, Ying wrote: > "zhangpeng (AS)" writes: > >> On 2023/11/23 13:26, Yin Fengwei wrote: >> >>> On 11/23/23 12:12, zhangpeng (AS) wrote: >>>> On 2023/11/23 9:09, Yin Fengwei wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Peng, >>>>> >>>>> On 11/22/23 22:00, Peng Zhang wrote: >>>>>> From: ZhangPeng >>>>>> >>>>>> The major fault occurred when using mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE) >>>>>> in application, which leading to an unexpected performance issue[1]. >>>>>> >>>>>> This caused by temporarily cleared pte during a read/modify/write update >>>>>> of the pte, eg, do_numa_page()/change_pte_range(). >>>>>> >>>>>> For the data segment of the user-mode program, the global variable area >>>>>> is a private mapping. After the pagecache is loaded, the private anonymous >>>>>> page is generated after the COW is triggered. Mlockall can lock COW pages >>>>>> (anonymous pages), but the original file pages cannot be locked and may >>>>>> be reclaimed. If the global variable (private anon page) is accessed when >>>>>> vmf->pte is zeroed in numa fault, a file page fault will be triggered. >>>>>> >>>>>> At this time, the original private file page may have been reclaimed. >>>>>> If the page cache is not available at this time, a major fault will be >>>>>> triggered and the file will be read, causing additional overhead. >>>>>> >>>>>> Fix this by rechecking the pte by holding ptl in filemap_fault() before >>>>>> triggering a major fault. >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/9e62fd9a-bee0-52bf-50a7-498fa17434ee@huawei.com/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: ZhangPeng >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang >>>>>> --- >>>>>>   mm/filemap.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ >>>>>>   1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c >>>>>> index 71f00539ac00..bb5e6a2790dc 100644 >>>>>> --- a/mm/filemap.c >>>>>> +++ b/mm/filemap.c >>>>>> @@ -3226,6 +3226,20 @@ vm_fault_t filemap_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf) >>>>>>               mapping_locked = true; >>>>>>           } >>>>>>       } else { >>>>>> +        pte_t *ptep = pte_offset_map_lock(vmf->vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, >>>>>> +                          vmf->address, &vmf->ptl); >>>>>> +        if (ptep) { >>>>>> +            /* >>>>>> +             * Recheck pte with ptl locked as the pte can be cleared >>>>>> +             * temporarily during a read/modify/write update. >>>>>> +             */ >>>>>> +            if (unlikely(!pte_none(ptep_get(ptep)))) >>>>>> +                ret = VM_FAULT_NOPAGE; >>>>>> +            pte_unmap_unlock(ptep, vmf->ptl); >>>>>> +            if (unlikely(ret)) >>>>>> +                return ret; >>>>>> +        } >>>>> I am curious. Did you try not to take PTL here and just check whether PTE is not NONE? >>>> Thank you for your reply. >>>> >>>> If we don't take PTL, the current use case won't trigger this issue either. >>> Is this verified by testing or just in theory? >> If we add a delay between ptep_modify_prot_start() and ptep_modify_prot_commit(), >> this issue will also trigger. Without delay, we haven't reproduced this problem >> so far. >> >>>> In most cases, if we don't take PTL, this issue won't be triggered. However, >>>> there is still a possibility of triggering this issue. The corner case is that >>>> task 2 triggers a page fault when task 1 is between ptep_modify_prot_start() >>>> and ptep_modify_prot_commit() in do_numa_page(). Furthermore,task 2 passes the >>>> check whether the PTE is not NONE before task 1 updates PTE in >>>> ptep_modify_prot_commit() without taking PTL. >>> There is very limited operations between ptep_modify_prot_start() and >>> ptep_modify_prot_commit(). While the code path from page fault to this check is >>> long. My understanding is it's very likely the PTE is not NONE when do PTE check >>> here without hold PTL (This is my theory. :)). >> Yes, there is a high probability that this issue won't occur without taking PTL. >> >>> In the other side, acquiring/releasing PTL may bring performance impaction. It may >>> not be big deal because the IO operations in this code path. But it's better to >>> collect some performance data IMHO. >> We tested the performance of file private mapping page fault (page_fault2.c of >> will-it-scale [1]) and file shared mapping page fault (page_fault3.c of will-it-scale). >> The difference in performance (in operations per second) before and after patch >> applied is about 0.7% on a x86 physical machine. > Whether is it improvement or reduction? After applying the patch, the performance (in operations per second) is 0.7% higher on average than before. > -- > Best Regards, > Huang, Ying > >> [1] https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale/tree/master >> >>> Regards >>> Yin, Fengwei >>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Yin, Fengwei >>>>> >>>>>> + >>>>>>           /* No page in the page cache at all */ >>>>>>           count_vm_event(PGMAJFAULT); >>>>>>           count_memcg_event_mm(vmf->vma->vm_mm, PGMAJFAULT); -- Best Regards, Peng