mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
	will@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	Miko.Lenczewski@arm.com, scott@os.amperecomputing.com,
	cl@gentwo.org
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: mm: support large block mapping when rodata=full
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 13:51:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3b3be4db-4f8e-4d81-8e52-dadad23dcd24@os.amperecomputing.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <452be681-f28b-4b5b-848d-c967672b4f5e@arm.com>



On 7/23/25 10:38 AM, Dev Jain wrote:
>
> On 23/06/25 6:56 pm, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>>> +
>>>> +int split_leaf_mapping(unsigned long addr)
>>> Thanks for coming up with the code. It does help to understand your 
>>> idea. Now I
>>> see why you suggested "split_mapping(start); split_mapping(end);" 
>>> model. It does
>>> make the implementation easier because we don't need a loop anymore. 
>>> But this
>>> may have a couple of problems:
>>>    1. We need walk the page table twice instead of once. It sounds 
>>> expensive.
>> Yes we need to walk twice. That may be more expensive or less expensive,
>> depending on the size of the range that you are splitting. If the 
>> range is large
>> then your approach loops through every leaf mapping between the start 
>> and end
>> which will be more expensive than just doing 2 walks. If the range is 
>> small then
>> your approach can avoid the second walk, but at the expense of all 
>> the extra
>> loop overhead.
>>
>> My suggestion requires 5 loads (assuming the maximum of 5 levels of 
>> lookup).
>> Personally I think this is probably acceptable? Perhaps we need some 
>> other
>> voices here.
>
> Hello all,
>
> I am starting to implement vmalloc-huge by default with BBML2 no-abort 
> on arm64.
> I see that there is some disagreement related to the way the splitting 
> needs to
> be implemented - I skimmed through the discussions and it will require 
> some work
> to understand what is going on :) hopefully I'll be back soon to give 
> some of
> my opinions.

Hi Dev,

Thanks for the heads up.

In the last email I suggested skip the leaf mappings in the split range 
in order to reduce page table walk overhead for split_mapping(start, 
end). In this way we can achieve:
     - reuse the most split code for repainting (just need 
NO_BLOCK_MAPPINGS | NO_CONT_MAPPINGS flag for repainting to split page 
table to PTEs)
     - just walk page table once
     - have similar page table walk overhead with 
split_mapping(start)/split_mapping(end) if the split range is large

I'm basically done on a new spin to implement it and solve all the 
review comments from v4. I should be able to post the new spin by the 
end of this week.

Regards,
Yang

>
>>
>>


  reply	other threads:[~2025-07-23 20:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-31  2:41 [v4 PATCH 0/4] arm64: support FEAT_BBM level 2 and " Yang Shi
2025-05-31  2:41 ` [PATCH 1/4] arm64: cpufeature: add AmpereOne to BBML2 allow list Yang Shi
2025-05-31  2:41 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: mm: make __create_pgd_mapping() and helpers non-void Yang Shi
2025-06-16 10:04   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-17 21:11     ` Yang Shi
2025-06-23 13:05       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-05-31  2:41 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm64: mm: support large block mapping when rodata=full Yang Shi
2025-06-16 11:58   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-16 12:33     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-17 21:01       ` Yang Shi
2025-06-16 16:24   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-17 21:09     ` Yang Shi
2025-06-23 13:26       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-23 19:12         ` Yang Shi
2025-06-26 22:39         ` Yang Shi
2025-07-23 17:38         ` Dev Jain
2025-07-23 20:51           ` Yang Shi [this message]
2025-07-24 11:43             ` Dev Jain
2025-07-24 17:59               ` Yang Shi
2025-05-31  2:41 ` [PATCH 4/4] arm64: mm: split linear mapping if BBML2 is not supported on secondary CPUs Yang Shi
2025-06-23 12:26   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-23 20:56     ` Yang Shi
2025-06-13 17:21 ` [v4 PATCH 0/4] arm64: support FEAT_BBM level 2 and large block mapping when rodata=full Yang Shi
2025-06-16  9:09   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-17 20:57     ` Yang Shi
2025-07-24 22:11 [v5 " Yang Shi
2025-07-24 22:11 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm64: mm: support " Yang Shi
2025-07-29 12:34   ` Dev Jain
2025-08-05 21:28     ` Yang Shi
2025-08-06  0:10       ` Yang Shi
2025-08-01 14:35   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-04 10:07     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-05 18:53     ` Yang Shi
2025-08-06  7:20       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-07  0:44         ` Yang Shi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3b3be4db-4f8e-4d81-8e52-dadad23dcd24@os.amperecomputing.com \
    --to=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=Miko.Lenczewski@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=cl@gentwo.org \
    --cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=scott@os.amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®