mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: david@redhat.com, willy@infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	will@kernel.org, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com,
	lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, vbabka@suse.cz, jannh@google.com,
	anshuman.khandual@arm.com, peterx@redhat.com, joey.gouly@arm.com,
	ioworker0@gmail.com, baohua@kernel.org, kevin.brodsky@arm.com,
	quic_zhenhuah@quicinc.com, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu,
	yangyicong@hisilicon.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	hughd@google.com, yang@os.amperecomputing.com, ziy@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] mm: Optimize mprotect() for MM_CP_PROT_NUMA by batch-skipping PTEs
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 10:42:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e029c030-2b0c-412d-b203-4342250b2deb@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250628113435.46678-2-dev.jain@arm.com>

On 28/06/2025 12:34, Dev Jain wrote:
> In case of prot_numa, there are various cases in which we can skip to the
> next iteration. Since the skip condition is based on the folio and not
> the PTEs, we can skip a PTE batch. Additionally refactor all of this
> into a new function to clean up the existing code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
> ---
>  mm/mprotect.c | 134 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 87 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/mprotect.c b/mm/mprotect.c
> index 88709c01177b..af10a7fbe6b8 100644
> --- a/mm/mprotect.c
> +++ b/mm/mprotect.c
> @@ -83,6 +83,83 @@ bool can_change_pte_writable(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
>  	return pte_dirty(pte);
>  }
>  
> +static int mprotect_folio_pte_batch(struct folio *folio, unsigned long addr,
> +		pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte, int max_nr_ptes)
> +{
> +	const fpb_t flags = FPB_IGNORE_DIRTY | FPB_IGNORE_SOFT_DIRTY;
> +
> +	if (!folio || !folio_test_large(folio) || (max_nr_ptes == 1))

The !folio check wasn't in the previous version. Why is it needed now?

> +		return 1;
> +
> +	return folio_pte_batch(folio, addr, ptep, pte, max_nr_ptes, flags,
> +			       NULL, NULL, NULL);
> +}
> +
> +static int prot_numa_skip_ptes(struct folio **foliop, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> +		unsigned long addr, pte_t oldpte, pte_t *pte, int target_node,
> +		int max_nr_ptes)
> +{
> +	struct folio *folio = NULL;
> +	int nr_ptes = 1;
> +	bool toptier;
> +	int nid;
> +
> +	/* Avoid TLB flush if possible */
> +	if (pte_protnone(oldpte))
> +		goto skip_batch;
> +
> +	folio = vm_normal_folio(vma, addr, oldpte);
> +	if (!folio)
> +		goto skip_batch;
> +
> +	if (folio_is_zone_device(folio) || folio_test_ksm(folio))
> +		goto skip_batch;
> +
> +	/* Also skip shared copy-on-write pages */
> +	if (is_cow_mapping(vma->vm_flags) &&
> +	    (folio_maybe_dma_pinned(folio) || folio_maybe_mapped_shared(folio)))
> +		goto skip_batch;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * While migration can move some dirty pages,
> +	 * it cannot move them all from MIGRATE_ASYNC
> +	 * context.
> +	 */
> +	if (folio_is_file_lru(folio) && folio_test_dirty(folio))
> +		goto skip_batch;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Don't mess with PTEs if page is already on the node
> +	 * a single-threaded process is running on.
> +	 */
> +	nid = folio_nid(folio);
> +	if (target_node == nid)
> +		goto skip_batch;
> +
> +	toptier = node_is_toptier(nid);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Skip scanning top tier node if normal numa
> +	 * balancing is disabled
> +	 */
> +	if (!(sysctl_numa_balancing_mode & NUMA_BALANCING_NORMAL) && toptier)
> +		goto skip_batch;
> +
> +	if (folio_use_access_time(folio)) {
> +		folio_xchg_access_time(folio, jiffies_to_msecs(jiffies));
> +
> +		/* Do not skip in this case */
> +		nr_ptes = 0;
> +		goto out;

This doesn't smell right... perhaps I'm not understanding the logic. Why do you
return nr_ptes = 0 if you end up in this conditional, but nr_ptes = 1 if you
don't take this conditional? I think you want to return nr_ptes == 0 for both
cases?...

> +	}
> +
> +skip_batch:
> +	nr_ptes = mprotect_folio_pte_batch(folio, addr, pte, oldpte, max_nr_ptes);
> +out:
> +	*foliop = folio;
> +	return nr_ptes;
> +}
> +
>  static long change_pte_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>  		struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
>  		unsigned long end, pgprot_t newprot, unsigned long cp_flags)
> @@ -94,6 +171,7 @@ static long change_pte_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>  	bool prot_numa = cp_flags & MM_CP_PROT_NUMA;
>  	bool uffd_wp = cp_flags & MM_CP_UFFD_WP;
>  	bool uffd_wp_resolve = cp_flags & MM_CP_UFFD_WP_RESOLVE;
> +	int nr_ptes;
>  
>  	tlb_change_page_size(tlb, PAGE_SIZE);
>  	pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
> @@ -108,8 +186,11 @@ static long change_pte_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>  	flush_tlb_batched_pending(vma->vm_mm);
>  	arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode();
>  	do {
> +		nr_ptes = 1;
>  		oldpte = ptep_get(pte);
>  		if (pte_present(oldpte)) {
> +			int max_nr_ptes = (end - addr) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> +			struct folio *folio = NULL;
>  			pte_t ptent;
>  
>  			/*
> @@ -117,53 +198,12 @@ static long change_pte_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>  			 * pages. See similar comment in change_huge_pmd.
>  			 */
>  			if (prot_numa) {
> -				struct folio *folio;
> -				int nid;
> -				bool toptier;
> -
> -				/* Avoid TLB flush if possible */
> -				if (pte_protnone(oldpte))
> -					continue;
> -
> -				folio = vm_normal_folio(vma, addr, oldpte);
> -				if (!folio || folio_is_zone_device(folio) ||
> -				    folio_test_ksm(folio))
> -					continue;
> -
> -				/* Also skip shared copy-on-write pages */
> -				if (is_cow_mapping(vma->vm_flags) &&
> -				    (folio_maybe_dma_pinned(folio) ||
> -				     folio_maybe_mapped_shared(folio)))
> -					continue;
> -
> -				/*
> -				 * While migration can move some dirty pages,
> -				 * it cannot move them all from MIGRATE_ASYNC
> -				 * context.
> -				 */
> -				if (folio_is_file_lru(folio) &&
> -				    folio_test_dirty(folio))
> -					continue;
> -
> -				/*
> -				 * Don't mess with PTEs if page is already on the node
> -				 * a single-threaded process is running on.
> -				 */
> -				nid = folio_nid(folio);
> -				if (target_node == nid)
> -					continue;
> -				toptier = node_is_toptier(nid);
> -
> -				/*
> -				 * Skip scanning top tier node if normal numa
> -				 * balancing is disabled
> -				 */
> -				if (!(sysctl_numa_balancing_mode & NUMA_BALANCING_NORMAL) &&
> -				    toptier)
> +				nr_ptes = prot_numa_skip_ptes(&folio, vma,
> +							      addr, oldpte, pte,
> +							      target_node,
> +							      max_nr_ptes);
> +				if (nr_ptes)
>  					continue;

...But now here nr_ptes == 0 for the "don't skip" case, so won't you process
that PTE twice because while (pte += nr_ptes, ...) won't advance it?

Suggest forcing nr_ptes = 1 after this conditional "continue"?

Thanks,
Ryan


> -				if (folio_use_access_time(folio))
> -					folio_xchg_access_time(folio,
> -						jiffies_to_msecs(jiffies));
>  			}
>  
>  			oldpte = ptep_modify_prot_start(vma, addr, pte);
> @@ -280,7 +320,7 @@ static long change_pte_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>  				pages++;
>  			}
>  		}
> -	} while (pte++, addr += PAGE_SIZE, addr != end);
> +	} while (pte += nr_ptes, addr += nr_ptes * PAGE_SIZE, addr != end);
>  	arch_leave_lazy_mmu_mode();
>  	pte_unmap_unlock(pte - 1, ptl);
>  


  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-30  9:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-28 11:34 [PATCH v4 0/4] Optimize mprotect() for large folios Dev Jain
2025-06-28 11:34 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] mm: Optimize mprotect() for MM_CP_PROT_NUMA by batch-skipping PTEs Dev Jain
2025-06-30  9:42   ` Ryan Roberts [this message]
2025-06-30  9:49     ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30  9:55       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-30 10:05         ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 11:25   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-30 11:39     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-30 11:53       ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-30 11:40     ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 11:51       ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-30 11:56         ` Dev Jain
2025-07-02  9:37   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-02 15:01     ` Dev Jain
2025-07-02 15:37       ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-28 11:34 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] mm: Add batched versions of ptep_modify_prot_start/commit Dev Jain
2025-06-30 10:10   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-30 10:17     ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 10:35       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-30 10:42         ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 12:57   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-01  4:44     ` Dev Jain
2025-07-01  7:33       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-01  8:06         ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-01  8:23           ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-01  8:34             ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-28 11:34 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] mm: Optimize mprotect() by PTE-batching Dev Jain
2025-06-28 12:39   ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 10:31   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-30 11:21     ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 11:47       ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 11:50       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-30 11:53         ` Dev Jain
2025-07-01  5:47     ` Dev Jain
2025-07-01  7:39       ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-30 12:52   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-01  5:30     ` Dev Jain
2025-07-01  8:03     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-01  8:06       ` Dev Jain
2025-07-01  8:24         ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-01  8:15       ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-01  8:30         ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-01  8:51           ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-01  9:53             ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-01 10:21               ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-01 11:31                 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-07-01 13:40                   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-02 10:32                     ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-02 15:03                       ` Dev Jain
2025-07-02 15:22                         ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-03 12:59                           ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-28 11:34 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] arm64: Add batched versions of ptep_modify_prot_start/commit Dev Jain
2025-06-30 10:43   ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-29 23:05 ` [PATCH v4 0/4] Optimize mprotect() for large folios Andrew Morton
2025-06-30  3:33   ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 10:45     ` Ryan Roberts
2025-06-30 11:22       ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 11:17 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-30 11:25   ` Dev Jain
2025-06-30 11:27 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-30 11:43   ` Dev Jain
2025-07-01  0:08     ` Andrew Morton

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=e029c030-2b0c-412d-b203-4342250b2deb@arm.com \
    --to=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=ioworker0@gmail.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
    --cc=kevin.brodsky@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=quic_zhenhuah@quicinc.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=yangyicong@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
    /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®