Transparent Hugepage support #3
Subsystems (24)
PATCH 1/1 Transparent Hugepage support #3
Hello,
this is the latest version of my patchset, it has all cleanups requested by previous review on linux-mm and more fixes and it ships the first working khugepaged daemon.
This seems feature complete as far as KVM is concerned, "madvise" mode for both /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled and /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/enabled is enough for hypervisor utilization. The default of the patchset is "always" for both, to be sure the new code gets exercised even by all apps that could benefit from this (yes, khugepaged is transparently enabled on all mappings with what I think is a negligeable/unmesurable overhead and perhaps it becomes beneficial for long-living vmas with intensive computations on them).
TODO (first things that come to mind):
- at leats smaps should stop calling split_huge_page
- find a way to fix the lru statistics so they will show the right ram amount (statistic code these days seems almost more complex than the real useful code, especially the isolated lru counter seems very dubious in its usefulness and it's further pain to deal with all over the VM). Fixing these counters is after all low priority because I know no app aware about the VM internals and depending on the exact size of inactive/active/anon/file/unevictable lru lists. fixign smaps not to split hugepages is much higher priority. The stats don't overflow or underflow, they're just not right.
- maybe add some other stat in addition to AnonHugePages in /proc/meminfo. You can monitor the effect of khugepaged or of an mprotect calling split_huge_page trivially with "grep Anon /proc/meminfo"
- I need to integrate Mel's memory compation code to be used by khugepaged and by the page faults if "defrag" sysfs file setting requires it. His results (especially with the bug fixes that decreased reclaim a lot) looks promising.
- likely we'll need a slab front allocator too allocating in 2m chunks, but this should be re-evaluated after merging Mel's work, maybe he already did that.
- khugepaged isn't yet capable of merging readonly shared anon pages, that isn't needed by KVM (KVM uses MADV_DONTFORK) but it might want to learn it for other apps
- khugepaged should also learn to skip the copy and collapse the hugepage in-place, if possible (to undo the effect of surpious split_huge_page)
I'm leaving this under a continous stress with scan_sleep_millisecs and defrag_sleep_millisecs set to 0 and a 5G swap storm + ~4G in ram. The swap storm before settling in pause() will call madvise to split all hugepages in ram and then it will run a further memset again to swapin everything a second time. Eventually it will settle and khugepaged will remerge as many hugepages as they're fully mapped in userland (mapped as swapcache is ok, but khugepaged will not trigger swapin I/O or swapcache minor fault) if there are enough not fragmented hugepages available.
This is shortly after start.
procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu----
r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa
0 5 3938052 67688 208 3684 1219 2779 1239 2779 396 1061 1 5 75 20 2 5 3937092 61612 208 3712 25120 24112 25120 24112 7420 5396 0 8 44 48 0 5 3932116 55536 208 3780 26444 21468 26444 21468 7532 5399 0 8 52 40 0 5 3927264 46724 208 3296 28208 22528 28328 22528 7871 5722 0 7 52 41 AnonPages: 1751352 kB AnonHugePages: 2021376 kB procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu---- r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa 0 5 3935604 58092 208 3864 1233 2787 1253 2787 400 1061 1 5 74 20 0 5 3933924 54248 208 3508 23748 23548 23904 23548 7112 4829 0 6 49 45 1 4 3937708 60696 208 3704 24680 28680 24760 28680 7034 5112 0 8 50 42 1 4 3934508 59084 208 3304 24096 21020 24156 21020 6832 5015 0 7 48 46 AnonPages: 1746296 kB AnonHugePages: 2023424 kB
this is after it settled and it's waiting in pause(). khugepaged when it's not copying with defrag_sleep/scan_sleep both = 0, just trigers a superoverschedule, but as you can see it's extremely low overhead, only taking 8% of 4 cores or 32% of 1 core. Likely most of the cpu is taking by schedule(). So you can imagine how low overhead it is when sleep is set to a "production" level and not stress test level. Default sleep is 10seconds and not 2usec...
1 0 5680228 106028 396 5060 0 0 0 0 534 341005 0 8 92 0 1 0 5680228 106028 396 5060 0 0 0 0 517 349159 0 9 91 0 1 0 5680228 106028 396 5060 0 0 0 0 518 346356 0 6 94 0 0 0 5680228 106028 396 5060 0 0 0 0 511 348478 0 8 92 0 AnonPages: 392396 kB AnonHugePages: 3371008 kB
So it looks good so far.
I think it's probably time to port the patchset to mmotd. Further review welcome!
Andrea
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 memcg compound
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Teach memcg to charge/uncharge compound pages.
---
mm/memcontrol.c +56 -37
@@ -1288,15 +1288,20 @@ static atomic_t memcg_drain_count;* cgroup which is not current target, returns false. This stock will be * refilled. */ -static bool consume_stock (struct mem_cgroup *mem) +static bool consume_stock (struct mem_cgroup *mem,int *page_size) {struct memcg_stock_pcp *stock;bool ret = true; stock = &get_cpu_var (memcg_stock); -if (mem == stock->cached && stock->charge) - stock->charge -=PAGE_SIZE ; -else /* need to call res_counter_charge */ +if (mem == stock->cached && stock->charge) { +if (*page_size > stock->charge) { + *page_size -= stock->charge; + stock->charge =0 ; + ret = false; + }else + stock->charge -= *page_size; + }else /* need to call res_counter_charge */ ret = false;put_cpu_var (memcg_stock);return ret;
@@ -1401,13 +1406,13 @@ static int __cpuinit memcg_stock_cpu_cal* oom-killer can be invoked. */ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge (struct mm_struct *mm, -gfp_t gfp_mask,struct mem_cgroup **memcg, -bool oom,struct page *page) +gfp_t gfp_mask,struct mem_cgroup **memcg, +bool oom,struct page *page,int page_size) {struct mem_cgroup *mem, *mem_over_limit;int nr_retries =MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_RETRIES ;struct res_counter *fail_res; -int csize =CHARGE_SIZE ; +int csize =max (page_size, (int )CHARGE_SIZE );if (unlikely (test_thread_flag (TIF_MEMDIE ))) {/* Don't account this! */
@@ -1439,7 +1444,7 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(strucint ret =0 ;unsigned long flags =0 ; -if (consume_stock (mem)) +if (consume_stock (mem, &page_size)) goto charged; ret =res_counter_charge (&mem->res, csize, &fail_res);
@@ -1460,8 +1465,8 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(struc res);/* reduce request size and retry */ -if (csize >PAGE_SIZE ) { - csize =PAGE_SIZE ; +if (csize > page_size) { + csize = page_size;continue ; }if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT))
@@ -1491,8 +1496,8 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(struc goto nomem; } } -if (csize >PAGE_SIZE ) -refill_stock (mem, csize -PAGE_SIZE ); +if (csize > page_size) +refill_stock (mem, csize - page_size); charged:/* * Insert ancestor (and ancestor's ancestors), to softlimit RB-tree.
@@ -1512,12 +1517,12 @@ nomem:* This function is for that and do uncharge, put css's refcnt. * gotten by try_charge(). */ -static void mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (struct mem_cgroup *mem) +static void mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (struct mem_cgroup *mem,int page_size) {if (!mem_cgroup_is_root (mem)) { -res_counter_uncharge (&mem->res,PAGE_SIZE ); +res_counter_uncharge (&mem->res, page_size);if (do_swap_account) -res_counter_uncharge (&mem->memsw,PAGE_SIZE ); +res_counter_uncharge (&mem->memsw, page_size); }css_put (&mem->css); }
@@ -1575,8 +1580,9 @@ struct mem_cgroup *try_get_mem_cgroup_fr*/ static void __mem_cgroup_commit_charge (struct mem_cgroup *mem, -struct page_cgroup *pc, -enum charge_type ctype) +struct page_cgroup *pc, +enum charge_type ctype, +int page_size) {/* try_charge() can return NULL to *memcg, taking care of it. */ if (!mem)
@@ -1585,7 +1591,7 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_commit_charge(slock_page_cgroup (pc);if (unlikely (PageCgroupUsed (pc))) {unlock_page_cgroup (pc); -mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (mem); +mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (mem, page_size);return ; }
@@ -1722,7 +1728,8 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_parent(struct goto put; parent =mem_cgroup_from_cont (pcg); - ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL , gfp_mask, &parent, false, page); + ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL , gfp_mask, &parent, false, page, +PAGE_SIZE );if (ret || !parent) goto put_back;
@@ -1730,7 +1737,7 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_parent(structif (!ret)css_put (&parent->css);/* drop extra refcnt by try_charge() */ else -mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (parent);/* does css_put */ +mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (parent,PAGE_SIZE );/* does css_put */ put_back:putback_lru_page (page); put:
@@ -1752,6 +1759,11 @@ static int mem_cgroup_charge_common(strustruct mem_cgroup *mem;struct page_cgroup *pc;int ret; +int page_size =PAGE_SIZE ; + +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page)); +if (PageHead (page)) + page_size <<=compound_order (page); pc =lookup_page_cgroup (page);/* can happen at boot */
@@ -1760,11 +1772,12 @@ static int mem_cgroup_charge_common(struprefetchw (pc); mem = memcg; - ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (mm, gfp_mask, &mem, true, page); + ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (mm, gfp_mask, &mem, true, page, + page_size);if (ret || !mem)return ret; -__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (mem, pc, ctype); +__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (mem, pc, ctype, page_size);return 0 ; }
@@ -1773,8 +1786,6 @@ int mem_cgroup_newpage_charge(struct pag {if (mem_cgroup_disabled ())return 0 ; -if (PageCompound (page)) -return 0 ;/* * If already mapped, we don't have to account. * If page cache, page->mapping has address_space.
@@ -1787,7 +1798,7 @@ int mem_cgroup_newpage_charge(struct pagif (unlikely (!mm)) mm = &init_mm;return mem_cgroup_charge_common (page, mm, gfp_mask, -MEM_CGROUP_CHARGE_TYPE_MAPPED ,NULL ); +MEM_CGROUP_CHARGE_TYPE_MAPPED ,NULL ); } static void
@@ -1880,14 +1891,14 @@ int mem_cgroup_try_charge_swapin(structif (!mem) goto charge_cur_mm; *ptr = mem; - ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL , mask, ptr, true, page); + ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL , mask, ptr, true, page,PAGE_SIZE );/* drop extra refcnt from tryget */ css_put (&mem->css);return ret; charge_cur_mm:if (unlikely (!mm)) mm = &init_mm; -return __mem_cgroup_try_charge (mm, mask, ptr, true, page); +return __mem_cgroup_try_charge (mm, mask, ptr, true, page,PAGE_SIZE ); } static void
@@ -1903,7 +1914,7 @@ __mem_cgroup_commit_charge_swapin(structcgroup_exclude_rmdir (&ptr->css); pc =lookup_page_cgroup (page);mem_cgroup_lru_del_before_commit_swapcache (page); -__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (ptr, pc, ctype); +__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (ptr, pc, ctype,PAGE_SIZE );mem_cgroup_lru_add_after_commit_swapcache (page);/* * Now swap is on-memory. This means this page may be
@@ -1952,11 +1963,12 @@ void mem_cgroup_cancel_charge_swapin(strreturn ;if (!mem)return ; -mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (mem); +mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (mem,PAGE_SIZE ); }static void -__do_uncharge (struct mem_cgroup *mem,const enum charge_type ctype) +__do_uncharge (struct mem_cgroup *mem,const enum charge_type ctype, +int page_size) {struct memcg_batch_info *batch =NULL ;bool uncharge_memsw = true;
@@ -1989,14 +2001,14 @@ __do_uncharge(struct mem_cgroup *mem, coif (batch->memcg != mem) goto direct_uncharge;/* remember freed charge and uncharge it later */ - batch->bytes +=PAGE_SIZE ; + batch->bytes += page_size;if (uncharge_memsw) - batch->memsw_bytes +=PAGE_SIZE ; + batch->memsw_bytes += page_size;return ; direct_uncharge: -res_counter_uncharge (&mem->res,PAGE_SIZE ); +res_counter_uncharge (&mem->res, page_size);if (uncharge_memsw) -res_counter_uncharge (&mem->memsw,PAGE_SIZE ); +res_counter_uncharge (&mem->memsw, page_size);return ; }
@@ -2009,6 +2021,11 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct pagestruct page_cgroup *pc;struct mem_cgroup *mem =NULL ;struct mem_cgroup_per_zone *mz; +int page_size =PAGE_SIZE ; + +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page)); +if (PageHead (page)) + page_size <<=compound_order (page);if (mem_cgroup_disabled ())return NULL ;
@@ -2016,6 +2033,8 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct pageif (PageSwapCache (page))return NULL ; +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page)); +/* * Check if our page_cgroup is valid */
@@ -2048,7 +2067,7 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct page }if (!mem_cgroup_is_root (mem)) -__do_uncharge (mem, ctype); +__do_uncharge (mem, ctype, page_size);if (ctype ==MEM_CGROUP_CHARGE_TYPE_SWAPOUT )mem_cgroup_swap_statistics (mem, true);mem_cgroup_charge_statistics (mem, pc, false);
@@ -2217,7 +2236,7 @@ int mem_cgroup_prepare_migration(structif (mem) { ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL ,GFP_KERNEL , &mem, false, - page); + page,PAGE_SIZE );css_put (&mem->css); } *ptr = mem;
@@ -2260,7 +2279,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_end_migration(struct mem* __mem_cgroup_commit_charge() check PCG_USED bit of page_cgroup. * So, double-counting is effectively avoided. */ -__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (mem, pc, ctype); +__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (mem, pc, ctype,PAGE_SIZE );/* * Both of oldpage and newpage are still under lock_page().
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 27 of 30] memcg compound
Quoted 5 lines · On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 07:20:51 +0100 Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Teach memcg to charge/uncharge compound pages.
Signed-off-by Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
I'm sorry but I'm glad if you don't touch fast path.
if (likely(page_size == PAGE_SIZE))
if (consume_stock(mem)) goto charged;
is my recommendation.
Bye.
-Kame
Quoted 289 lines
---
mm/memcontrol.c +56
-38@@ -1288,15 +1288,20 @@ static atomic_t memcg_drain_count;* cgroup which is not current target, returns false. This stock will be * refilled. */ -static bool consume_stock (struct mem_cgroup *mem) +static bool consume_stock (struct mem_cgroup *mem,int *page_size) {struct memcg_stock_pcp *stock;bool ret = true; stock = &get_cpu_var (memcg_stock); -if (mem == stock->cached && stock->charge) - stock->charge -=PAGE_SIZE ; -else /* need to call res_counter_charge */ +if (mem == stock->cached && stock->charge) { +if (*page_size > stock->charge) { + *page_size -= stock->charge; + stock->charge =0 ; + ret = false; + }else + stock->charge -= *page_size; + }else /* need to call res_counter_charge */ ret = false;put_cpu_var (memcg_stock);return ret;@@ -1401,13 +1406,13 @@ static int __cpuinit memcg_stock_cpu_cal* oom-killer can be invoked. */ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge (struct mm_struct *mm, -gfp_t gfp_mask,struct mem_cgroup **memcg, -bool oom,struct page *page) +gfp_t gfp_mask,struct mem_cgroup **memcg, +bool oom,struct page *page,int page_size) {struct mem_cgroup *mem, *mem_over_limit;int nr_retries =MEM_CGROUP_RECLAIM_RETRIES ;struct res_counter *fail_res; -int csize =CHARGE_SIZE ; +int csize =max (page_size, (int )CHARGE_SIZE );if (unlikely (test_thread_flag (TIF_MEMDIE ))) {/* Don't account this! */ @@ -1439,7 +1444,7 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(strucint ret =0 ;unsigned long flags =0 ; -if (consume_stock (mem)) +if (consume_stock (mem, &page_size)) goto charged; ret =res_counter_charge (&mem->res, csize, &fail_res);@@ -1460,8 +1465,8 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(struc res);/* reduce request size and retry */ -if (csize >PAGE_SIZE ) { - csize =PAGE_SIZE ; +if (csize > page_size) { + csize = page_size;continue ; }if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT))@@ -1491,8 +1496,8 @@ static int __mem_cgroup_try_charge(struc goto nomem; } } -if (csize >PAGE_SIZE ) -refill_stock (mem, csize -PAGE_SIZE ); +if (csize > page_size) +refill_stock (mem, csize - page_size); charged:/* * Insert ancestor (and ancestor's ancestors), to softlimit RB-tree. @@ -1512,12 +1517,12 @@ nomem:* This function is for that and do uncharge, put css's refcnt. * gotten by try_charge(). */ -static void mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (struct mem_cgroup *mem) +static void mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (struct mem_cgroup *mem,int page_size) {if (!mem_cgroup_is_root (mem)) { -res_counter_uncharge (&mem->res,PAGE_SIZE ); +res_counter_uncharge (&mem->res, page_size);if (do_swap_account) -res_counter_uncharge (&mem->memsw,PAGE_SIZE ); +res_counter_uncharge (&mem->memsw, page_size); }css_put (&mem->css); }@@ -1575,8 +1580,9 @@ struct mem_cgroup *try_get_mem_cgroup_fr*/ static void __mem_cgroup_commit_charge (struct mem_cgroup *mem, -struct page_cgroup *pc, -enum charge_type ctype) +struct page_cgroup *pc, +enum charge_type ctype, +int page_size) {/* try_charge() can return NULL to *memcg, taking care of it. */ if (!mem)@@ -1585,7 +1591,7 @@ static void __mem_cgroup_commit_charge(slock_page_cgroup (pc);if (unlikely (PageCgroupUsed (pc))) {unlock_page_cgroup (pc); -mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (mem); +mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (mem, page_size);return ; }@@ -1722,7 +1728,8 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_parent(struct goto put; parent =mem_cgroup_from_cont (pcg); - ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL , gfp_mask, &parent, false, page); + ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL , gfp_mask, &parent, false, page, +PAGE_SIZE );if (ret || !parent) goto put_back;@@ -1730,7 +1737,7 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_parent(structif (!ret)css_put (&parent->css);/* drop extra refcnt by try_charge() */ else -mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (parent);/* does css_put */ +mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (parent,PAGE_SIZE );/* does css_put */ put_back:putback_lru_page (page); put:@@ -1752,6 +1759,11 @@ static int mem_cgroup_charge_common(strustruct mem_cgroup *mem;struct page_cgroup *pc;int ret; +int page_size =PAGE_SIZE ; + +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page)); +if (PageHead (page)) + page_size <<=compound_order (page); pc =lookup_page_cgroup (page);/* can happen at boot */ @@ -1760,11 +1772,12 @@ static int mem_cgroup_charge_common(struprefetchw (pc); mem = memcg; - ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (mm, gfp_mask, &mem, true, page); + ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (mm, gfp_mask, &mem, true, page, + page_size);if (ret || !mem)return ret; -__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (mem, pc, ctype); +__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (mem, pc, ctype, page_size);return 0 ; }@@ -1773,8 +1786,6 @@ int mem_cgroup_newpage_charge(struct pag {if (mem_cgroup_disabled ())return 0 ; -if (PageCompound (page)) -return 0 ;/* * If already mapped, we don't have to account. * If page cache, page->mapping has address_space. @@ -1787,7 +1798,7 @@ int mem_cgroup_newpage_charge(struct pagif (unlikely (!mm)) mm = &init_mm;return mem_cgroup_charge_common (page, mm, gfp_mask, -MEM_CGROUP_CHARGE_TYPE_MAPPED ,NULL ); +MEM_CGROUP_CHARGE_TYPE_MAPPED ,NULL ); } static void@@ -1880,14 +1891,14 @@ int mem_cgroup_try_charge_swapin(structif (!mem) goto charge_cur_mm; *ptr = mem; - ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL , mask, ptr, true, page); + ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL , mask, ptr, true, page,PAGE_SIZE );/* drop extra refcnt from tryget */ css_put (&mem->css);return ret; charge_cur_mm:if (unlikely (!mm)) mm = &init_mm; -return __mem_cgroup_try_charge (mm, mask, ptr, true, page); +return __mem_cgroup_try_charge (mm, mask, ptr, true, page,PAGE_SIZE ); } static void@@ -1903,7 +1914,7 @@ __mem_cgroup_commit_charge_swapin(structcgroup_exclude_rmdir (&ptr->css); pc =lookup_page_cgroup (page);mem_cgroup_lru_del_before_commit_swapcache (page); -__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (ptr, pc, ctype); +__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (ptr, pc, ctype,PAGE_SIZE );mem_cgroup_lru_add_after_commit_swapcache (page);/* * Now swap is on-memory. This means this page may be @@ -1952,11 +1963,12 @@ void mem_cgroup_cancel_charge_swapin(strreturn ;if (!mem)return ; -mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (mem); +mem_cgroup_cancel_charge (mem,PAGE_SIZE ); }static void -__do_uncharge (struct mem_cgroup *mem,const enum charge_type ctype) +__do_uncharge (struct mem_cgroup *mem,const enum charge_type ctype, +int page_size) {struct memcg_batch_info *batch =NULL ;bool uncharge_memsw = true;@@ -1989,14 +2001,14 @@ __do_uncharge(struct mem_cgroup *mem, coif (batch->memcg != mem) goto direct_uncharge;/* remember freed charge and uncharge it later */ - batch->bytes +=PAGE_SIZE ; + batch->bytes += page_size;if (uncharge_memsw) - batch->memsw_bytes +=PAGE_SIZE ; + batch->memsw_bytes += page_size;return ; direct_uncharge: -res_counter_uncharge (&mem->res,PAGE_SIZE ); +res_counter_uncharge (&mem->res, page_size);if (uncharge_memsw) -res_counter_uncharge (&mem->memsw,PAGE_SIZE ); +res_counter_uncharge (&mem->memsw, page_size);return ; }@@ -2009,6 +2021,11 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct pagestruct page_cgroup *pc;struct mem_cgroup *mem =NULL ;struct mem_cgroup_per_zone *mz; +int page_size =PAGE_SIZE ; + +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page)); +if (PageHead (page)) + page_size <<=compound_order (page);if (mem_cgroup_disabled ())return NULL ;@@ -2016,6 +2033,8 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct pageif (PageSwapCache (page))return NULL ; +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page)); +/* * Check if our page_cgroup is valid */ @@ -2048,7 +2067,7 @@ __mem_cgroup_uncharge_common(struct page }if (!mem_cgroup_is_root (mem)) -__do_uncharge (mem, ctype); +__do_uncharge (mem, ctype, page_size);if (ctype ==MEM_CGROUP_CHARGE_TYPE_SWAPOUT )mem_cgroup_swap_statistics (mem, true);mem_cgroup_charge_statistics (mem, pc, false);@@ -2217,7 +2236,7 @@ int mem_cgroup_prepare_migration(structif (mem) { ret =__mem_cgroup_try_charge (NULL ,GFP_KERNEL , &mem, false, - page); + page,PAGE_SIZE );css_put (&mem->css); } *ptr = mem;@@ -2260,7 +2279,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_end_migration(struct mem* __mem_cgroup_commit_charge() check PCG_USED bit of page_cgroup. * So, double-counting is effectively avoided. */ -__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (mem, pc, ctype); +__mem_cgroup_commit_charge (mem, pc, ctype,PAGE_SIZE );/* * Both of oldpage and newpage are still under lock_page(). --
Quoted 5 lines
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 27 of 30] memcg compound
Quoted 9 lines · KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Quoted 5 lines · On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 07:20:51 +0100 Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Teach memcg to charge/uncharge compound pages.
Signed-off-by Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Quoted 7 lines
I'm sorry but I'm glad if you don't touch fast path.
if (
likely(page_size == PAGE_SIZE))if (consume_stock(mem)) goto charged;is my recommendation.
Ok updated. But I didn't touch this code since last submit, because I didn't merge the other patch (not yet in mainline) that you said would complicate things. So I assume most if it will need to be rewritten. I also though you wanted to remove the hpage size from the batch logic.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 27 of 30] memcg compound
Quoted 16 lines · On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 16:44:08 +0100 Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 15 lines · KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Quoted 5 lines · On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 07:20:51 +0100 Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Teach memcg to charge/uncharge compound pages.
Signed-off-by Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>I'm sorry but I'm glad if you don't touch fast path.
if (
likely(page_size == PAGE_SIZE))if (consume_stock(mem)) goto charged;
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
is my recommendation.
Ok updated. But I didn't touch this code since last submit, because I didn't merge the other patch (not yet in mainline) that you said would complicate things. So I assume most if it will need to be rewritten. I also though you wanted to remove the hpage size from the batch logic.
I see. Thank you.
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 split_huge_page_mm/vma
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
split_huge_page_mm/vma compat code. Each one of those would need to be expanded to hundred of lines of complex code without a fully reliable split_huge_page_mm/vma functionality.
---
arch/x86/kernel/vm86_32.c +1 -0
@@ -179,6 +179,7 @@ static void mark_screen_rdonly(struct mmif (pud_none_or_clear_bad (pud)) goto out; pmd =pmd_offset (pud,0xA0000 ); +split_huge_page_mm (mm,0xA0000 , pmd);if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad (pmd)) goto out; pte =pte_offset_map_lock (mm, pmd,0xA0000 , &ptl);
mm/mempolicy.c +1 -0
@@ -446,6 +446,7 @@ static inline int check_pmd_range(struct pmd =pmd_offset (pud, addr); do { next = pmd_addr_end(addr, end); + split_huge_page_vma(vma, pmd); if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad(pmd)) continue; if (check_pte_range(vma, pmd, addr, next, nodes,
mm/mincore.c +1 -0
@@ -132,6 +132,7 @@ static long do_mincore(unsigned long addif (pud_none_or_clear_bad (pud)) goto none_mapped; pmd =pmd_offset (pud, addr); +split_huge_page_vma (vma, pmd);if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad (pmd)) goto none_mapped;
mm/mprotect.c +1 -0
@@ -89,6 +89,7 @@ static inline void change_pmd_range(stru pmd =pmd_offset (pud, addr); do { next = pmd_addr_end(addr, end); + split_huge_page_mm(mm, addr, pmd); if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad(pmd)) continue; change_pte_range(mm, pmd, addr, next, newprot, dirty_accountable);
mm/mremap.c +1 -0
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ static pmd_t *get_old_pmd(struct mm_strureturn NULL ; pmd =pmd_offset (pud, addr); +split_huge_page_mm (mm, addr, pmd);if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad (pmd))return NULL ;
mm/pagewalk.c +1 -0
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ static int walk_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, un pmd =pmd_offset (pud, addr); do { next = pmd_addr_end(addr, end); + split_huge_page_mm(walk->mm, addr, pmd); if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad(pmd)) { if (walk->pte_hole) err = walk->pte_hole(addr, next, walk);
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 memcg huge memory
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Add memcg charge/uncharge to hugepage faults in huge_memory.c.
---
mm/huge_memory.c +25 -5
@@ -212,6 +212,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(VM_BUG_ON (!PageCompound (page)); pgtable =pte_alloc_one (mm, address);if (unlikely (!pgtable)) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (page);put_page (page);return VM_FAULT_OOM ; }
@@ -228,6 +229,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock);if (unlikely (!pmd_none (*pmd))) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (page);put_page (page);pte_free (mm, pgtable); }else {
@@ -265,6 +267,10 @@ int do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(struct mm page =alloc_hugepage (transparent_hugepage_defrag (vma));if (unlikely (!page)) goto out; +if (unlikely (mem_cgroup_newpage_charge (page, mm,GFP_KERNEL ))) { +put_page (page); + goto out; + }return __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page (mm, vma, address, pmd, page, haddr);
@@ -365,9 +371,15 @@ static int do_huge_pmd_wp_page_fallback(for (i =0 ; i <HPAGE_PMD_NR ; i++) { pages[i] =alloc_page_vma (GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE , vma, address); -if (unlikely (!pages[i])) { -while (--i >=0 ) +if (unlikely (!pages[i] || +mem_cgroup_newpage_charge (pages[i], mm, +GFP_KERNEL ))) { +if (pages[i])put_page (pages[i]); +while (--i >=0 ) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (pages[i]); +put_page (pages[i]); + }kfree (pages); ret |=VM_FAULT_OOM ; goto out;
@@ -426,8 +438,10 @@ out: out_free_pages:spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock); -for (i =0 ; i <HPAGE_PMD_NR ; i++) +for (i =0 ; i <HPAGE_PMD_NR ; i++) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (pages[i]);put_page (pages[i]); + }kfree (pages); goto out; }
@@ -469,6 +483,11 @@ int do_huge_pmd_wp_page(struct mm_struct goto out; } +if (unlikely (mem_cgroup_newpage_charge (new_page, mm,GFP_KERNEL ))) { +put_page (new_page); + ret |=VM_FAULT_OOM ; + goto out; + }copy_huge_page (new_page, page, haddr, vma,HPAGE_PMD_NR );__SetPageUptodate (new_page);
@@ -480,9 +499,10 @@ int do_huge_pmd_wp_page(struct mm_structsmp_wmb ();spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock); -if (unlikely (!pmd_same (*pmd, orig_pmd))) +if (unlikely (!pmd_same (*pmd, orig_pmd))) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (new_page);put_page (new_page); -else { + }else {pmd_t entry; entry =mk_pmd (new_page, vma->vm_page_prot); entry =maybe_pmd_mkwrite (pmd_mkdirty (entry), vma);
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 28 of 30] memcg huge memory
Quoted 19 lines · On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 07:20:52 +0100 Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Add memcg charge/uncharge to hugepage faults in
huge_memory.c.Signed-off-by Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>---
mm/huge_memory.c +1
-0@@ -212,6 +212,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(VM_BUG_ON (!PageCompound (page)); pgtable =pte_alloc_one (mm, address);if (unlikely (!pgtable)) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (page);put_page (page);return VM_FAULT_OOM ; }
mm/huge_memory.c static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page( · line 234
Quoted 6 lines
mm/huge_memory.c +1
-0@@ -228,6 +229,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock);if (unlikely (!pmd_none (*pmd))) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (page);put_page (page);pte_free (mm, pgtable);
Can't we do this put_page() and uncharge() outside of page table lock ?
Thanks,
-Kame
Quoted 17 lines
mm/huge_memory.c +4
-1}else {@@ -265,6 +267,10 @@ int do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(struct mm page =alloc_hugepage (transparent_hugepage_defrag (vma));if (unlikely (!page)) goto out; +if (unlikely (mem_cgroup_newpage_charge (page, mm,GFP_KERNEL ))) { +put_page (page); + goto out; + }return __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page (mm, vma, address, pmd, page, haddr);@@ -365,9 +371,15 @@ static int do_huge_pmd_wp_page_fallback(for (i =0 ; i <HPAGE_PMD_NR ; i++) { pages[i] =alloc_page_vma (GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE , vma, address); -if (unlikely (!pages[i])) {
mm/huge_memory.c static int do_huge_pmd_wp_page_fallback( · line 382
Quoted 10 lines
mm/huge_memory.c +8
-1-while (--i >=0 ) +if (unlikely (!pages[i] || +mem_cgroup_newpage_charge (pages[i], mm, +GFP_KERNEL ))) { +if (pages[i])put_page (pages[i]); +while (--i >=0 ) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (pages[i]); +put_page (pages[i]); + }
Maybe we can use batched_uncharge here. As
mem_cgroup_uncharge_start();
while (--i) {
mem_cgroup_uncharge_page(page[i]);
put_page(pages[i]);
}
mem_cgroup_uncharge_end();Hmm...but this requires some modification to memcontrol.c. Okay, please leave this as my homework.
mm/huge_memory.c out: · line 444
Quoted 12 lines
mm/huge_memory.c +3
-1kfree (pages); ret |=VM_FAULT_OOM ; goto out;@@ -426,8 +438,10 @@ out: out_free_pages:spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock); -for (i =0 ; i <HPAGE_PMD_NR ; i++) +for (i =0 ; i <HPAGE_PMD_NR ; i++) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (pages[i]);put_page (pages[i]); + }
here too.
Bye.
-Kame
Quoted 19 lines
mm/huge_memory.c +5
-0kfree (pages); goto out; }@@ -469,6 +483,11 @@ int do_huge_pmd_wp_page(struct mm_struct goto out; } +if (unlikely (mem_cgroup_newpage_charge (new_page, mm,GFP_KERNEL ))) { +put_page (new_page); + ret |=VM_FAULT_OOM ; + goto out; + }copy_huge_page (new_page, page, haddr, vma,HPAGE_PMD_NR );__SetPageUptodate (new_page);@@ -480,9 +499,10 @@ int do_huge_pmd_wp_page(struct mm_structsmp_wmb ();
mm/huge_memory.c int do_huge_pmd_wp_page(struct mm_struct · line 508
Quoted 10 lines
mm/huge_memory.c +3
-2spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock); -if (unlikely (!pmd_same (*pmd, orig_pmd))) +if (unlikely (!pmd_same (*pmd, orig_pmd))) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (new_page);put_page (new_page); -else { + }else {pmd_t entry; entry =mk_pmd (new_page, vma->vm_page_prot); entry =maybe_pmd_mkwrite (pmd_mkdirty (entry), vma);
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 28 of 30] memcg huge memory
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 7 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-0@@ -228,6 +229,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page( spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock); if (unlikely(!pmd_none(*pmd))) { + mem_cgroup_uncharge_page(page); put_page(page); pte_free(mm, pgtable);
Quoted 1 line · KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Can't we do this
put_page()anduncharge()outside of page table lock ?
Yes we can, but it's only a microoptimization because this only triggers during a controlled race condition across different threads. But no problem to optimize it...
mm/huge_memory.c +2 -1
@@ -228,6 +228,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock);if (unlikely (!pmd_none (*pmd))) { +spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock);put_page (page);pte_free (mm, pgtable); }else {
@@ -238,8 +239,8 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(page_add_new_anon_rmap (page, vma, haddr);set_pmd_at (mm, haddr, pmd, entry);prepare_pmd_huge_pte (pgtable, mm); +spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock); } -spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock);return ret; }
mm/huge_memory.c +1 -0
@@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock);if (unlikely (!pmd_none (*pmd))) {spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock); +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (page);put_page (page);pte_free (mm, pgtable); }else {
Also below I appended the update memcg_compound to stop using the batch system. Also note your "likely" I removed it because for KVM most of the time it'll be TransHugePages to be charged. I prefer likely/unlikely when it's always a slow path no matter what workload (assuming useful/optimized workloads only ;). Like said in earlier email I guess the below may be wasted time because of the rework coming on the file. Also note the TransHugePage check here it's used instead of page_size == PAGE_SIZE to eliminate that additional branch at compile time if TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE=n.
Now the only real pain remains in the LRU list accounting, I tried to solve it but found no clean way that didn't require mess all over vmscan.c. So for now hugepages in lru are accounted as 4k pages ;). Nothing breaks just stats won't be as useful to the admin...
Subject: memcg compound
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Teach memcg to charge/uncharge compound pages.
---
mm/memcontrol.c +45 -31
227 lines not on this page · raw message
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 28 of 30] memcg huge memory
Quoted 50 lines · On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:08:07 +0100 Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 7 lines
mm/huge_memory.c +1
-0@@ -228,6 +229,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock);if (unlikely (!pmd_none (*pmd))) { +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (page);put_page (page);pte_free (mm, pgtable);Quoted 1 line · KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Can't we do this
put_page()anduncharge()outside of page table lock ?Yes we can, but it's only a microoptimization because this only triggers during a controlled race condition across different threads. But no problem to optimize it...
mm/huge_memory.c +2
-1@@ -228,6 +228,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock);if (unlikely (!pmd_none (*pmd))) { +spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock);put_page (page);pte_free (mm, pgtable); }else {@@ -238,8 +239,8 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(page_add_new_anon_rmap (page, vma, haddr);set_pmd_at (mm, haddr, pmd, entry);prepare_pmd_huge_pte (pgtable, mm); +spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock); } -spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock);return ret; }mm/huge_memory.c +1
-0@@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ static int __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page(spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock);if (unlikely (!pmd_none (*pmd))) {spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock); +mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (page);put_page (page);pte_free (mm, pgtable); }else {
Quoted 5 lines
Also below I appended the update
memcg_compoundto stop using the batch system. Also note your "likely" I removed it because for KVM most of the time it'll be TransHugePages to be charged. I prefer likely/unlikely when it's always a slow path no matter what workload (assuming useful/optimized workloads only ;).
Hmm.. But I never believe KVM will be "likley" case in a few years.
Quoted 6 lines
Like said in earlier
email I guess the below may be wasted time because of the rework coming on the file. Also note the TransHugePage check here it's used instead ofpage_size==PAGE_SIZEto eliminate that additional branch at compile time if TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE=n.
seems nice.
Quoted 5 lines
Now the only real pain remains in the LRU list accounting, I tried to solve it but found no clean way that didn't require mess all over
vmscan.c. So for now hugepages in lru are accounted as 4k pages ;). Nothing breaks just stats won't be as useful to the admin...
Hmm, interesting/important problem...I keep it in my mind.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 28 of 30] memcg huge memory
Quoted 7 lines · KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Quoted 6 lines
Now the only real pain remains in the LRU list accounting, I tried to solve it but found no clean way that didn't require mess all over
vmscan.c. So for now hugepages in lru are accounted as 4k pages ;). Nothing breaks just stats won't be as useful to the admin...Hmm, interesting/important problem...I keep it in my mind.
I hope the memcg accounting is not broken, I see you do the right thing while charging pages. The patch overall seems alright. Could you please update the Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt file as well with what these changes mean and memcg_tests.txt to indicate how to test the changes?
Signature · 8 lines
Three Cheers, Balbir Singh -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 28 of 30] memcg huge memory
Quoted 7 lines · Balbir Singh
Quoted 6 lines · KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Quoted 6 lines
Now the only real pain remains in the LRU list accounting, I tried to solve it but found no clean way that didn't require mess all over
vmscan.c. So for now hugepages in lru are accounted as 4k pages ;). Nothing breaks just stats won't be as useful to the admin...
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
Hmm, interesting/important problem...I keep it in my mind.
I hope the memcg accounting is not broken, I see you do the right thing while charging pages. The patch overall seems alright. Could you please update the
Documentation/cgroups/memory.txtfile as well with what these changes mean and memcg_tests.txt to indicate how to test the changes?
I think we need update memcg's stats too. Otherwise the usage_in_bytes in root cgroup become wrong(of course, those stats are also important for other cgroups). If new vm_stat for transparent hugepage is added, it would be better to add it to memcg too.
Moreover, considering the behavior of split_huge_page, we should update both css->refcnt and pc->mem_cgroup about all the tail pages. Otherwise, if a transparent hugepage splitted, tail pages of it become stale from the viewpoint of memcg, i.e. those pages are not linked to any memcg's LRU.
It's another topic where we should update those data. IMHO, css->refcnt can be update in try_charge/uncharge(I think __css_get()/__css_put(), which are now defined in mmotm, can be used for it w/o adding big overhead). As for pc->mem_cgroup, I think it would be better to update them by adding some hook in __split_huge_page_map() or some to avoid adding some overhead to hot-path(charge/uncharge).
Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 28 of 30] memcg huge memory
In reply to Balbir SinghQuoted 7 lines · Balbir Singh
Quoted 6 lines · KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Quoted 6 lines
Now the only real pain remains in the LRU list accounting, I tried to solve it but found no clean way that didn't require mess all over
vmscan.c. So for now hugepages in lru are accounted as 4k pages ;). Nothing breaks just stats won't be as useful to the admin...
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
Hmm, interesting/important problem...I keep it in my mind.
I hope the memcg accounting is not broken, I see you do the right thing while charging pages. The patch overall seems alright. Could you please update the
Documentation/cgroups/memory.txtfile as well with what these changes mean and memcg_tests.txt to indicate how to test the changes?
Where exactly does that memory.txt go into the implementation details? Grepping the function names I changed over that file leads to nothing. It doesn't seem to be covering internals at all. The other file only place that shows some function names I could see needing an update is this:
At try_charge(), there are no flags to say "this page is charged".
at this point, usage += PAGE_SIZE.
At commit(), the function checks the page should be charged or not
and set flags or avoid charging.(usage -= PAGE_SIZE)
At cancel(), simply usage -= PAGE_SIZE.
but it won't go into much more details than this, so I can only imagine to add this, explaining how the real page size is obtained and if I would go into the compound page accounting explanation that probably would bring it to a detail level that file didn't have in the first place.
But again I'm very confused on what exactly you expect me to update on that file, so if below isn't ok best would be that you send me a patch to integrate with your signoff. That would be the preferred way to me.
Thanks!
Andrea
Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt +4 -0
@@ -4,6 +4,10 @@ NOTE: The Memory Resource Controller has to as the memory controller in this document. Do not confuse memory controller used here with the memory controller that is used in hardware. +NOTE: When in this documentation we refer to PAGE_SIZE, we actually +mean the real page size of the page being accounted which is bigger than +PAGE_SIZE for compound pages. + Salient features a. Enable control of Anonymous, Page Cache (mapped and unmapped) and
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 28 of 30] memcg huge memory
Quoted 29 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 7 lines · Balbir Singh
Quoted 6 lines · KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Quoted 6 lines
Now the only real pain remains in the LRU list accounting, I tried to solve it but found no clean way that didn't require mess all over
vmscan.c. So for now hugepages in lru are accounted as 4k pages ;). Nothing breaks just stats won't be as useful to the admin...Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
Hmm, interesting/important problem...I keep it in my mind.
I hope the memcg accounting is not broken, I see you do the right thing while charging pages. The patch overall seems alright. Could you please update the
Documentation/cgroups/memory.txtfile as well with what these changes mean and memcg_tests.txt to indicate how to test the changes?Where exactly does that memory.txt go into the implementation details? Grepping the function names I changed over that file leads to nothing. It doesn't seem to be covering internals at all. The other file only place that shows some function names I could see needing an update is this:
At
try_charge(), there are no flags to say "this page is charged".
at this point, usage +=PAGE_SIZE.At
commit(), the function checks the page should be charged or not
and set flags or avoid charging.(usage -=PAGE_SIZE)
Quoted 8 lines
At
cancel(), simply usage -=PAGE_SIZE.but it won't go into much more details than this, so I can only imagine to add this, explaining how the real page size is obtained and if I would go into the compound page accounting explanation that probably would bring it to a detail level that file didn't have in the first place.
I would expect some Documentation stating the following
1. Impact of transparent hugepages on memcg
2. What does this mean to limit_in_bytes and usage_in_bytes and other features
3. What does this mean for OOM, reclaim, etc, can there be some side-effects.
Quoted 4 lines
But again I'm very confused on what exactly you expect me to update on that file, so if below isn't ok best would be that you send me a patch to integrate with your signoff. That would be the preferred way to me.
I'll read through your patchset and see if I can come up with a useful patch.
Signature · 7 lines
Balbir -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 28 of 30] memcg huge memory
Quoted 3 lines · Balbir Singh
I would expect some Documentation stating the following
1. Impact of transparent hugepages on memcg
Expected is none except using right page size for compound pages like described in my comment so far. If there is an impact visible to the user then we've got something to fix. Only change in implementation terms is to use the right page_size instead of fixed PAGE_SIZE.
Quoted 2 lines
2. What does this mean to
limit_in_bytesandusage_in_bytesand other features
Dunno but I would expect no change at all.
Quoted 2 lines
3. What does this mean for OOM, reclaim, etc, can there be some side-effects.
Zero impact, but lru ordering isn't always guaranteed _identical_ as tail pages may have to be added to the lru while the lru head is isolated and we can't mangle over the stack of the other cpu that is accessed lockless. Same lru ordering is guaranteed however when split_huge_page runs on a page that has PageLRU set (I add tail pages to page_head->lru instead of the zone lru head in that case). besides this lru detail may change in future implementation and it is totally unrelated to memcg as far as I can tell so no idea why to document it there...
Quoted 2 lines
I'll read through your patchset and see if I can come up with a useful patch.
Ok, thanks!
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 add pmd mmu_notifier helpers
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Add mmu notifier helpers to handle pmd huge operations.
---
include/linux/mmu_notifier.h +40 -0
@@ -243,6 +243,32 @@ static inline void mmu_notifier_mm_destr __pte; \ }) +#define pmdp_clear_flush_notify (__vma, __address, __pmdp) \ +({ \ + pmd_t __pmd; \ + struct vm_area_struct *___vma = __vma; \ + unsigned long ___address = __address; \ + VM_BUG_ON(__address & ~HPAGE_PMD_MASK); \ + mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(___vma->vm_mm, ___address, \ + (__address)+HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);\ + __pmd = pmdp_clear_flush(___vma, ___address, __pmdp); \ + mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(___vma->vm_mm, ___address, \ + (__address)+HPAGE_PMD_SIZE); \ + __pmd; \ +}) + +#define pmdp_splitting_flush_notify (__vma, __address, __pmdp) \ +({ \ + struct vm_area_struct *___vma = __vma; \ + unsigned long ___address = __address; \ + VM_BUG_ON(__address & ~HPAGE_PMD_MASK); \ + mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(___vma->vm_mm, ___address, \ + (__address)+HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);\ + pmdp_splitting_flush(___vma, ___address, __pmdp); \ + mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(___vma->vm_mm, ___address, \ + (__address)+HPAGE_PMD_SIZE); \ +}) +#define ptep_clear_flush_young_notify (__vma, __address, __ptep) \ ({ \ int __young; \
@@ -254,6 +280,17 @@ static inline void mmu_notifier_mm_destr __young; \ }) +#define pmdp_clear_flush_young_notify (__vma, __address, __pmdp) \ +({ \ + int __young; \ + struct vm_area_struct *___vma = __vma; \ + unsigned long ___address = __address; \ + __young = pmdp_clear_flush_young(___vma, ___address, __pmdp); \ + __young |= mmu_notifier_clear_flush_young(___vma->vm_mm, \ + ___address); \ + __young; \ +}) +#define set_pte_at_notify (__mm, __address, __ptep, __pte) \ ({ \ struct mm_struct *___mm = __mm; \
@@ -305,7 +342,10 @@ static inline void mmu_notifier_mm_destr }#define ptep_clear_flush_young_notify ptep_clear_flush_young +#define pmdp_clear_flush_young_notify pmdp_clear_flush_young#define ptep_clear_flush_notify ptep_clear_flush +#define pmdp_clear_flush_notify pmdp_clear_flush +#define pmdp_splitting_flush_notify pmdp_splitting_flush#define set_pte_at_notify set_pte_at#endif /* CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER */
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 ensure mapcount is taken on head pages
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Unlike the page count, the page mapcount cannot be taken on PageTail compound pages.
---
include/linux/rmap.h +1 -0
@@ -105,6 +105,7 @@ void page_remove_rmap(struct page *);static inline void page_dup_rmap (struct page *page) { +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page));atomic_inc (&page->_mapcount); }
mm/rmap.c +4 -0
@@ -674,6 +674,7 @@ void page_add_anon_rmap(struct page *pag struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address) { int first = atomic_inc_and_test(&page->_mapcount); +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page));if (first)__inc_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_PAGES );if (unlikely (PageKsm (page)))
@@ -701,6 +702,7 @@ void page_add_new_anon_rmap(struct page struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long address) {VM_BUG_ON (address < vma->vm_start || address >= vma->vm_end); +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page));SetPageSwapBacked (page);atomic_set (&page->_mapcount,0 );/* increment count (starts at -1) */ __inc_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_PAGES );
@@ -733,6 +735,7 @@ void page_add_file_rmap(struct page *pag*/ void page_remove_rmap (struct page *page) { +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page));/* page still mapped by someone else? */ if (!atomic_add_negative (-1 , &page->_mapcount))return ;
@@ -1281,6 +1284,7 @@ static int rmap_walk_file(struct page *pint rmap_walk (struct page *page,int (*rmap_one)(struct page *,struct vm_area_struct *,unsigned long ,void *),void *arg) { +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page));VM_BUG_ON (!PageLocked (page));if (unlikely (PageKsm (page)))
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 transparent hugepage vmstat
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Add hugepage stat information to /proc/vmstat and /proc/meminfo.
---
fs/proc/meminfo.c +7 -0
@@ -101,6 +101,9 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_#ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE "HardwareCorrupted: %5lu kB\n"#endif +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +"AnonHugePages: %8lu kB\n" +#endif ,K (i.totalram), K(i.freeram),
@@ -151,6 +154,10 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_#ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE ,atomic_long_read(&mce_bad_pages) << (PAGE_SHIFT - 10)#endif +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE + ,K(global_page_state(NR_ANON_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGES) * +HPAGE_PMD_NR ) +#endif );hugetlb_report_meminfo (m);
include/linux/mmzone.h +1 -0
@@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ enum zone_stat_item {NUMA_LOCAL ,/* allocation from local node */ NUMA_OTHER ,/* allocation from other node */ #endif +NR_ANON_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGES , NR_VM_ZONE_STAT_ITEMS };/*
mm/huge_memory.c +3 -0
@@ -715,6 +715,9 @@ static void __split_huge_page_refcount(sput_page (page_tail); } +__dec_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGES ); +__mod_zone_page_state (zone,NR_ANON_PAGES ,HPAGE_PMD_NR ); +ClearPageCompound (page);compound_unlock (page);spin_unlock_irq (&zone->lru_lock);
mm/rmap.c +16 -4
@@ -688,8 +688,13 @@ void page_add_anon_rmap(struct page *pag {int first =atomic_inc_and_test (&page->_mapcount);VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page)); -if (first) -__inc_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_PAGES ); +if (first) { +if (!PageTransHuge (page)) +__inc_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_PAGES ); +else +__inc_zone_page_state (page, +NR_ANON_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGES ); + }if (unlikely (PageKsm (page)))return ;
@@ -718,7 +723,10 @@ void page_add_new_anon_rmap(struct pageVM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page));SetPageSwapBacked (page);atomic_set (&page->_mapcount,0 );/* increment count (starts at -1) */ -__inc_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_PAGES ); +if (!PageTransHuge (page)) +__inc_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_PAGES ); +else +__inc_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGES );__page_set_anon_rmap (page, vma, address);if (page_evictable (page, vma))lru_cache_add_lru (page,LRU_ACTIVE_ANON );
@@ -766,7 +774,11 @@ void page_remove_rmap(struct page *page) }if (PageAnon (page)) {mem_cgroup_uncharge_page (page); -__dec_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_PAGES ); +if (!PageTransHuge (page)) +__dec_zone_page_state (page,NR_ANON_PAGES ); +else +__dec_zone_page_state (page, +NR_ANON_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGES ); }else {__dec_zone_page_state (page,NR_FILE_MAPPED );mem_cgroup_update_file_mapped (page,-1 );
mm/vmstat.c +3 -0
@@ -655,6 +655,9 @@ static const char * const vmstat_text[]"numa_local" ,"numa_other" , #endif +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +"nr_anon_transparent_hugepages" , +#endif #ifdef CONFIG_VM_EVENT_COUNTERS "pgpgin",
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 madvise(MADV_HUGEPAGE)
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Add madvise MADV_HUGEPAGE to mark regions that are important to be hugepage backed. Return -EINVAL if the vma is not of an anonymous type, or the feature isn't built into the kernel. Never silently return success.
---
include/linux/huge_mm.h +6 -0
@@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ extern int split_huge_page(struct page *#endif extern unsigned long vma_address (struct page *page,struct vm_area_struct *vma); +extern int hugepage_madvise (unsigned long *vm_flags);static inline int PageTransHuge (struct page *page) {VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page));
@@ -119,6 +120,11 @@ static inline int split_huge_page(struct#define wait_split_huge_page (__anon_vma, __pmd) \ do { } while (0)#define PageTransHuge (page) 0 +static inline int hugepage_madvise (unsigned long *vm_flags) +{ +BUG_ON (0 ); +return 0 ; +}#endif /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */ #endif /* _LINUX_HUGE_MM_H */
mm/huge_memory.c +22 -3
@@ -463,9 +463,11 @@ int do_huge_pmd_wp_page(struct mm_structput_page (new_page); new_page =NULL ; } -if (unlikely (!new_page)) -return do_huge_pmd_wp_page_fallback (mm, vma, address, - pmd, orig_pmd, page, haddr); +if (unlikely (!new_page)) { + ret =do_huge_pmd_wp_page_fallback (mm, vma, address, + pmd, orig_pmd, page, haddr); + goto out; + }copy_huge_page (new_page, page, haddr, vma,HPAGE_PMD_NR );__SetPageUptodate (new_page);
@@ -495,6 +497,7 @@ int do_huge_pmd_wp_page(struct mm_struct } out_unlock:spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock); +out:return ret; }
@@ -845,3 +848,19 @@ out_unlock: out:return ret; } + +int hugepage_madvise (unsigned long *vm_flags) +{ +/* +* Be somewhat over-protective like KSM for now! +*/ +if (*vm_flags & (VM_HUGEPAGE |VM_SHARED |VM_MAYSHARE | +VM_PFNMAP |VM_IO |VM_DONTEXPAND | +VM_RESERVED |VM_HUGETLB |VM_INSERTPAGE | +VM_MIXEDMAP |VM_SAO )) +return -EINVAL ; + + *vm_flags |=VM_HUGEPAGE ; + +return 0 ; +}
mm/madvise.c +8 -0
@@ -71,6 +71,11 @@ static long madvise_behavior(struct vm_aif (error) goto out;break ; +case MADV_HUGEPAGE : + error =hugepage_madvise (&new_flags); +if (error) + goto out; +break ; }if (new_flags == vma->vm_flags) {
@@ -283,6 +288,9 @@ madvise_behavior_valid(int behavior)case MADV_MERGEABLE :case MADV_UNMERGEABLE :#endif +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +case MADV_HUGEPAGE : +#endif return 1 ;default :
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 special pmd_trans_* functions
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
These returns 0 at compile time when the config option is disabled, to allow gcc to eliminate the transparent hugepage function calls at compile time without additional #ifdefs (only the export of those functions have to be visible to gcc but they won't be required at link time and huge_memory.o can be not built at all).
---
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h +18 -0
@@ -394,6 +394,24 @@ static inline int pmd_present(pmd_t pmd)return pmd_flags (pmd) & _PAGE_PRESENT; } +static inline int pmd_trans_splitting (pmd_t pmd) +{ +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +return pmd_val (pmd) & _PAGE_SPLITTING; +#else +return 0 ; +#endif +} + +static inline int pmd_trans_huge (pmd_t pmd) +{ +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +return pmd_val (pmd) & _PAGE_PSE; +#else +return 0 ; +#endif +} +static inline int pmd_none (pmd_t pmd) {/* Only check low word on 32-bit platforms, since it might be
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h +2 -0
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@#define _PAGE_BIT_PAT_LARGE 12/* On 2MB or 1GB pages */ #define _PAGE_BIT_SPECIAL _PAGE_BIT_UNUSED1#define _PAGE_BIT_CPA_TEST _PAGE_BIT_UNUSED1 +#define _PAGE_BIT_SPLITTING _PAGE_BIT_UNUSED1/* only valid on a PSE pmd */ #define _PAGE_BIT_NX 63/* No execute: only valid after cpuid check */ /* If _PAGE_BIT_PRESENT is clear, we use these: */
@@ -45,6 +46,7 @@#define _PAGE_PAT_LARGE (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_PAT_LARGE)#define _PAGE_SPECIAL (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_SPECIAL)#define _PAGE_CPA_TEST (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_CPA_TEST) +#define _PAGE_SPLITTING (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_SPLITTING)#define __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SPECIAL#ifdef CONFIG_KMEMCHECK
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 add pmd_huge_pte to mm_struct
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
This increase the size of the mm struct a bit but it is needed to preallocate one pte for each hugepage so that split_huge_page will not require a fail path. Guarantee of success is a fundamental property of split_huge_page to avoid decrasing swapping reliability and to avoid adding -ENOMEM fail paths that would otherwise force the hugepage-unaware VM code to learn rolling back in the middle of its pte mangling operations (if something we need it to learn handling pmd_trans_huge natively rather being capable of rollback). When split_huge_page runs a pte is needed to succeed the split, to map the newly splitted regular pages with a regular pte. This way all existing VM code remains backwards compatible by just adding a split_huge_page* one liner. The memory waste of those preallocated ptes is negligible and so it is worth it.
---
include/linux/mm_types.h +3 -0
@@ -291,6 +291,9 @@ struct mm_struct {#ifdef CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER struct mmu_notifier_mm *mmu_notifier_mm;#endif +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +pgtable_t pmd_huge_pte;/* protected by page_table_lock */ +#endif };/* Future-safe accessor for struct mm_struct's cpu_vm_mask. */
kernel/fork.c +7 -0
@@ -498,6 +498,9 @@ void __mmdrop(struct mm_struct *mm)mm_free_pgd (mm);destroy_context (mm);mmu_notifier_mm_destroy (mm); +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +VM_BUG_ON (mm->pmd_huge_pte); +#endif free_mm (mm); }EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL (__mmdrop);
@@ -638,6 +641,10 @@ struct mm_struct *dup_mm(struct task_str mm->token_priority =0 ; mm->last_interval =0 ; +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE + mm->pmd_huge_pte =NULL ; +#endif +if (!mm_init (mm, tsk)) goto fail_nomem;
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 pmd_trans_huge migrate bugcheck
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
No pmd_trans_huge should ever materialize in migration ptes areas, because try_to_unmap will split the hugepage before migration ptes are instantiated.
---
mm/migrate.c +1 -0
@@ -99,6 +99,7 @@ static int remove_migration_pte(struct p goto out; pmd =pmd_offset (pud, addr); +VM_BUG_ON (pmd_trans_huge (*pmd));if (!pmd_present (*pmd)) goto out;
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 22 of 30] pmd_trans_huge migrate bugcheck
Quoted 4 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
No
pmd_trans_hugeshould ever materialize in migration ptes areas, becausetry_to_unmapwill split the hugepage before migration ptes are instantiated.
try_to_unmap? How do you isolate the hugepages from the LRU? If you do isolate the huge pages via a LRU and get a 2M page then the migration logic has to be modified to be aware that huge pages may split during try_to_unmap.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 22 of 30] pmd_trans_huge migrate bugcheck
Quoted 10 lines · Christoph Lameter
Quoted 4 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
No
pmd_trans_hugeshould ever materialize in migration ptes areas, becausetry_to_unmapwill split the hugepage before migration ptes are instantiated.
try_to_unmap? How do you isolate the hugepages from the LRU? If you do isolate the huge pages via a LRU and get a 2M page then the migration logic has to be modified to be aware that huge pages may split duringtry_to_unmap.
Good point, all we need to do is to add one split_huge_page before isolate_lru_page, the one in try_to_unmap isn't enough. Effectively I guess I can remove the one in try_to_unmap then and replace it with BUG_ON(TransHugePage(page)).
Subject: pmd_trans_huge migrate
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
No pmd_trans_huge should ever materialize in migration ptes areas, because we split the hugepage before migration ptes are instantiated.
---
mm/migrate.c +4 -0
@@ -99,6 +99,7 @@ static int remove_migration_pte(struct p goto out; pmd =pmd_offset (pud, addr); +VM_BUG_ON (pmd_trans_huge (*pmd));if (!pmd_present (*pmd)) goto out;
@@ -833,6 +834,9 @@ static int do_move_page_to_node_array(st !migrate_all) goto put_and_set; +if (unlikely (PageTransHuge (page))) +if (unlikely (split_huge_page (page))) + goto put_and_set; err =isolate_lru_page (page);if (!err) {list_add_tail (&page->lru, &pagelist);
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 22 of 30] pmd_trans_huge migrate bugcheck
mm/migrate.c static int do_move_page_to_node_array(st · line 842
Quoted 10 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
mm/migrate.c +3
-0@@ -833,6 +834,9 @@ static int do_move_page_to_node_array(st !migrate_all) goto put_and_set; +if (unlikely (PageTransHuge (page))) +if (unlikely (split_huge_page (page))) + goto put_and_set; err =isolate_lru_page (page);if (!err) {list_add_tail (&page->lru, &pagelist);
This was too fast of a patch, I've to move this a few lines above so the mapcount check will work too (also note, pagetranshuge bugs on tail pages and I like to keep it that way to be more strict on the other users, so it should be replaced by pagecompound in addition to moving it a little up). refcounting will adjust automatically and atomically during the split, simply mapcount will be >0 after the split on the tailpage and the tail_page->_count will be boosted by the mapcount too.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 config_transparent_hugepage
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Add config option.
---
mm/Kconfig +14 -0
@@ -283,3 +283,17 @@ config NOMMU_INITIAL_TRIM_EXCESS of 1 says that all excess pages should be trimmed. See Documentation/nommu-mmap.txt for more information. + +config TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE + bool "Transparent Hugepage support" if EMBEDDED + depends on X86_64 + default y + help + Transparent Hugepages allows the kernel to use huge pages and + huge tlb transparently to the applications whenever possible. + This feature can improve computing performance to certain + applications by speeding up page faults during memory + allocation, by reducing the number of tlb misses and by speeding + up the pagetable walking. + + If memory constrained on embedded, you may want to say N.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 comment reminder in destroy_compound_page
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Warn destroy_compound_page that __split_huge_page_refcount is heavily dependent on its internal behavior.
---
mm/page_alloc.c +1 -0
@@ -311,6 +311,7 @@ void prep_compound_page(struct page *pag } } +/* update __split_huge_page_refcount if you change this function */ static int destroy_compound_page (struct page *page,unsigned long order) {int i;
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 define MADV_HUGEPAGE
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Define MADV_HUGEPAGE.
---
include/asm-generic/mman-common.h +2 -0
@@ -45,6 +45,8 @@#define MADV_MERGEABLE 12/* KSM may merge identical pages */ #define MADV_UNMERGEABLE 13/* KSM may not merge identical pages */ +#define MADV_HUGEPAGE 14/* Worth backing with hugepages */ +/* compatibility flags */ #define MAP_FILE 0
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 split_huge_page paging
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Paging logic that splits the page before it is unmapped and added to swap to ensure backwards compatibility with the legacy swap code. Eventually swap should natively pageout the hugepages to increase performance and decrease seeking and fragmentation of swap space. swapoff can just skip over huge pmd as they cannot be part of swap yet. In add_to_swap be careful to split the page only if we got a valid swap entry so we don't split hugepages with a full swap.
---
mm/memory-failure.c +2 -0
@@ -378,6 +378,8 @@ static void collect_procs_anon(struct pastruct task_struct *tsk;struct anon_vma *av; +if (unlikely (split_huge_page (page))) +return ;read_lock (&tasklist_lock); av =page_lock_anon_vma (page);if (av ==NULL )/* Not actually mapped anymore */
mm/rmap.c +4 -0
@@ -1178,6 +1178,10 @@ int try_to_unmap(struct page *page, enumBUG_ON (!PageLocked (page)); +if (unlikely (PageTransHuge (page))) +if (unlikely (split_huge_page (page))) +return SWAP_AGAIN ; +if (unlikely (PageKsm (page))) ret =try_to_unmap_ksm (page, flags);else if (PageAnon (page))
mm/swap_state.c +6 -0
@@ -156,6 +156,12 @@ int add_to_swap(struct page *page)if (!entry.val)return 0 ; +if (unlikely (PageTransHuge (page))) +if (unlikely (split_huge_page (page))) { +swapcache_free (entry,NULL ); +return 0 ; + } +/* * Radix-tree node allocations from PF_MEMALLOC contexts could * completely exhaust the page allocator. __GFP_NOMEMALLOC
mm/swapfile.c +2 -0
@@ -905,6 +905,8 @@ static inline int unuse_pmd_range(struct pmd =pmd_offset (pud, addr); do { next = pmd_addr_end(addr, end); + if (unlikely(pmd_trans_huge(*pmd))) + continue; if (pmd_none_or_clear_bad(pmd)) continue; ret = unuse_pte_range(vma, pmd, addr, next, entry, page);
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 bail out gup_fast on splitting pmd
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Force gup_fast to take the slow path and block if the pmd is splitting, not only if it's none.
---
arch/x86/mm/gup.c +12 -1
@@ -156,7 +156,18 @@ static int gup_pmd_range(pud_t pud, unsipmd_t pmd = *pmdp; next =pmd_addr_end (addr, end); -if (pmd_none (pmd)) +/* +* The pmd_trans_splitting() check below explains why +* pmdp_splitting_flush has to flush the tlb, to stop +* this gup-fast code from running while we set the +* splitting bit in the pmd. Returning zero will take +* the slow path that will call wait_split_huge_page() +* if the pmd is still in splitting state. gup-fast +* can't because it has irq disabled and +* wait_split_huge_page() would never return as the +* tlb flush IPI wouldn't run. +*/ +if (pmd_none (pmd) ||pmd_trans_splitting (pmd))return 0 ;if (unlikely (pmd_large (pmd))) {if (!gup_huge_pmd (pmd, addr, next, write, pages, nr))
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 export maybe_mkwrite
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
huge_memory.c needs it too when it fallbacks in copying hugepages into regular fragmented pages if hugepage allocation fails during COW.
---
include/linux/mm.h +13 -0
@@ -380,6 +380,19 @@ static inline void set_compound_order(st }/* +* Do pte_mkwrite, but only if the vma says VM_WRITE. We do this when +* servicing faults for write access. In the normal case, do always want +* pte_mkwrite. But get_user_pages can cause write faults for mappings +* that do not have writing enabled, when used by access_process_vm. +*/ +static inline pte_t maybe_mkwrite (pte_t pte,struct vm_area_struct *vma) +{ +if (likely (vma->vm_flags &VM_WRITE )) + pte =pte_mkwrite (pte); +return pte; +} + +/* * Multiple processes may "see" the same page. E.g. for untouched * mappings of /dev/null, all processes see the same page full of * zeroes, and text pages of executables and shared libraries have
mm/memory.c +0 -13
@@ -1943,19 +1943,6 @@ static inline int pte_unmap_same(structreturn same; } -/* -* Do pte_mkwrite, but only if the vma says VM_WRITE. We do this when -* servicing faults for write access. In the normal case, do always want -* pte_mkwrite. But get_user_pages can cause write faults for mappings -* that do not have writing enabled, when used by access_process_vm. -*/ -static inline pte_t maybe_mkwrite (pte_t pte,struct vm_area_struct *vma) -{ -if (likely (vma->vm_flags &VM_WRITE )) - pte =pte_mkwrite (pte); -return pte; -} -static inline void cow_user_page (struct page *dst,struct page *src,unsigned long va,struct vm_area_struct *vma) {/*
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 add native_set_pmd_at
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Used by paravirt and not paravirt set_pmd_at.
---
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h +6 -0
@@ -528,6 +528,12 @@ static inline void native_set_pte_at(strnative_set_pte (ptep, pte); } +static inline void native_set_pmd_at (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr, +pmd_t *pmdp ,pmd_t pmd) +{ +native_set_pmd (pmdp, pmd); +} +#ifndef CONFIG_PARAVIRT /* * Rules for using pte_update - it must be called after any PTE update which
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 compound_lock
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Add a new compound_lock() needed to serialize put_page against __split_huge_page_refcount().
---
include/linux/mm.h +11 -0
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@#include <linux/prio_tree.h> #include <linux/debug_locks.h> #include <linux/mm_types.h> +#include <linux/bit_spinlock.h> struct mempolicy ;struct anon_vma ;
@@ -294,6 +295,16 @@ static inline int is_vmalloc_or_module_a }#endif +static inline void compound_lock (struct page *page) +{ +bit_spin_lock (PG_compound_lock, &page->flags); +} + +static inline void compound_unlock (struct page *page) +{ +bit_spin_unlock (PG_compound_lock, &page->flags); +} +static inline struct page *compound_head (struct page *page) {if (unlikely (PageTail (page)))
include/linux/page-flags.h +1 -0
@@ -108,6 +108,7 @@ enum pageflags {#ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE PG_hwpoison,/* hardware poisoned page. Don't touch */ #endif + PG_compound_lock, __NR_PAGEFLAGS,/* Filesystems */
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 no paravirt version of pmd ops
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
No paravirt version of set_pmd_at/pmd_update/pmd_update_defer.
---
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h +3 -0
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ extern struct list_head pgd_list;#else /* !CONFIG_PARAVIRT */ #define set_pte (ptep, pte) native_set_pte(ptep, pte)#define set_pte_at (mm, addr, ptep, pte) native_set_pte_at(mm, addr, ptep, pte) +#define set_pmd_at (mm, addr, pmdp, pmd) native_set_pmd_at(mm, addr, pmdp, pmd)#define set_pte_atomic (ptep, pte) \ native_set_pte_atomic(ptep, pte)
@@ -57,6 +58,8 @@ extern struct list_head pgd_list;#define pte_update (mm, addr, ptep) do { } while (0)#define pte_update_defer (mm, addr, ptep) do { } while (0) +#define pmd_update (mm, addr, ptep) do { } while (0) +#define pmd_update_defer (mm, addr, ptep) do { } while (0)#define pgd_val (x) native_pgd_val(x)#define __pgd (x) native_make_pgd(x)
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 clear page compound
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
split_huge_page must transform a compound page to a regular page and needs ClearPageCompound.
---
include/linux/page-flags.h +16 -1
@@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ static inline void set_page_writeback(st* tests can be used in performance sensitive paths. PageCompound is * generally not used in hot code paths. */ -__PAGEFLAG(Head, head) +__PAGEFLAG(Head, head) CLEARPAGEFLAG(Head, head) __PAGEFLAG(Tail, tail)static inline int PageCompound (struct page *page)
@@ -355,6 +355,13 @@ static inline int PageCompound(struct pa return page->flags & ((1L << PG_head) | (1L << PG_tail)); } +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +static inline void ClearPageCompound (struct page *page) +{ +BUG_ON (!PageHead (page)); +ClearPageHead (page); +} +#endif #else /* * Reduce page flag use as much as possible by overlapping
@@ -392,6 +399,14 @@ static inline void __ClearPageTail(struc page->flags &= ~PG_head_tail_mask; } +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +static inline void ClearPageCompound (struct page *page) +{ +BUG_ON (page->flags & PG_head_tail_mask != (1L << PG_compound)); +ClearPageCompound (page); +} +#endif +#endif /* !PAGEFLAGS_EXTENDED */ #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 transparent hugepage core
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Lately I've been working to make KVM use hugepages transparently without the usual restrictions of hugetlbfs. Some of the restrictions I'd like to see removed:
1) hugepages have to be swappable or the guest physical memory remains locked in RAM and can't be paged out to swap
2) if a hugepage allocation fails, regular pages should be allocated instead and mixed in the same vma without any failure and without userland noticing
3) if some task quits and more hugepages become available in the buddy, guest physical memory backed by regular pages should be relocated on hugepages automatically in regions under madvise(MADV_HUGEPAGE) (ideally event driven by waking up the kernel deamon if the order=HPAGE_PMD_SHIFT-PAGE_SHIFT list becomes not null)
4) avoidance of reservation and maximization of use of hugepages whenever possible. Reservation (needed to avoid runtime fatal faliures) may be ok for 1 machine with 1 database with 1 database cache with 1 database cache size known at boot time. It's definitely not feasible with a virtualization hypervisor usage like RHEV-H that runs an unknown number of virtual machines with an unknown size of each virtual machine with an unknown amount of pagecache that could be potentially useful in the host for guest not using O_DIRECT (aka cache=off).
hugepages in the virtualization hypervisor (and also in the guest!) are much more important than in a regular host not using virtualization, becasue with NPT/EPT they decrease the tlb-miss cacheline accesses from 24 to 19 in case only the hypervisor uses transparent hugepages, and they decrease the tlb-miss cacheline accesses from 19 to 15 in case both the linux hypervisor and the linux guest both uses this patch (though the guest will limit the addition speedup to anonymous regions only for now...). Even more important is that the tlb miss handler is much slower on a NPT/EPT guest than for a regular shadow paging or no-virtualization scenario. So maximizing the amount of virtual memory cached by the TLB pays off significantly more with NPT/EPT than without (even if there would be no significant speedup in the tlb-miss runtime).
The first (and more tedious) part of this work requires allowing the VM to handle anonymous hugepages mixed with regular pages transparently on regular anonymous vmas. This is what this patch tries to achieve in the least intrusive possible way. We want hugepages and hugetlb to be used in a way so that all applications can benefit without changes (as usual we leverage the KVM virtualization design: by improving the Linux VM at large, KVM gets the performance boost too).
The most important design choice is: always fallback to 4k allocation if the hugepage allocation fails! This is the _very_ opposite of some large pagecache patches that failed with -EIO back then if a 64k (or similar) allocation failed...
Second important decision (to reduce the impact of the feature on the existing pagetable handling code) is that at any time we can split an hugepage into 512 regular pages and it has to be done with an operation that can't fail. This way the reliability of the swapping isn't decreased (no need to allocate memory when we are short on memory to swap) and it's trivial to plug a split_huge_page* one-liner where needed without polluting the VM. Over time we can teach mprotect, mremap and friends to handle pmd_trans_huge natively without calling split_huge_page*. The fact it can't fail isn't just for swap:
if split_huge_page would return -ENOMEM (instead of the current void) we'd need to rollback the mprotect from the middle of it (ideally including undoing the split_vma) which would be a big change and in the very wrong direction (it'd likely be simpler not to call split_huge_page at all and to teach mprotect and friends to handle hugepages instead of rolling them back from the middle). In short the very value of split_huge_page is that it can't fail.
The collapsing and madvise(MADV_HUGEPAGE) part will remain separated and incremental and it'll just be an "harmless" addition later if this initial part is agreed upon. It also should be noted that locking-wise replacing regular pages with hugepages is going to be very easy if compared to what I'm doing below in split_huge_page, as it will only happen when page_count(page) matches page_mapcount(page) if we can take the PG_lock and mmap_sem in write mode. collapse_huge_page will be a "best effort" that (unlike split_huge_page) can fail at the minimal sign of trouble and we can try again later. collapse_huge_page will be similar to how KSM works and the madvise(MADV_HUGEPAGE) will work similar to madvise(MADV_MERGEABLE).
The default I like is that transparent hugepages are used at page fault time. This can be changed with /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled. The control knob can be set to three values "always", "madvise", "never" which mean respectively that hugepages are always used, or only inside madvise(MADV_HUGEPAGE) regions, or never used. /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/defrag instead controls if the hugepage allocation should defrag memory aggressively "always", only inside "madvise" regions, or "never".
The pmd_trans_splitting/pmd_trans_huge locking is very solid. The put_page (from get_user_page users that can't use mmu notifier like O_DIRECT) that runs against a __split_huge_page_refcount instead was a pain to serialize in a way that would result always in a coherent page count for both tail and head. I think my locking solution with a compound_lock taken only after the page_first is valid and is still a PageHead should be safe but it surely needs review from SMP race point of view. In short there is no current existing way to serialize the O_DIRECT final put_page against split_huge_page_refcount so I had to invent a new one (O_DIRECT loses knowledge on the mapping status by the time gup_fast returns so...). And I didn't want to impact all gup/gup_fast users for now, maybe if we change the gup interface substantially we can avoid this locking, I admit I didn't think too much about it because changing the gup unpinning interface would be invasive.
If we ignored O_DIRECT we could stick to the existing compound refcounting code, by simply adding a get_user_pages_fast_flags(foll_flags) where KVM (and any other mmu notifier user) would call it without FOLL_GET (and if FOLL_GET isn't set we'd just BUG_ON if nobody registered itself in the current task mmu notifier list yet). But O_DIRECT is fundamental for decent performance of virtualized I/O on fast storage so we can't avoid it to solve the race of put_page against split_huge_page_refcount to achieve a complete hugepage feature for KVM.
Swap and oom works fine (well just like with regular pages ;). MMU notifier is handled transparently too, with the exception of the young bit on the pmd, that didn't have a range check but I think KVM will be fine because the whole point of hugepages is that EPT/NPT will also use a huge pmd when they notice gup returns pages with PageCompound set, so they won't care of a range and there's just the pmd young bit to check in that case.
NOTE: in some cases if the L2 cache is small, this may slowdown and waste memory during COWs because 4M of memory are accessed in a single fault instead of 8k (the payoff is that after COW the program can run faster). So we might want to switch the copy_huge_page (and clear_huge_page too) to not temporal stores. I also extensively researched ways to avoid this cache trashing with a full prefault logic that would cow in 8k/16k/32k/64k up to 1M (I can send those patches that fully implemented prefault) but I concluded they're not worth it and they add an huge additional complexity and they remove all tlb benefits until the full hugepage has been faulted in, to save a little bit of memory and some cache during app startup, but they still don't improve substantially the cache-trashing during startup if the prefault happens in >4k chunks. One reason is that those 4k pte entries copied are still mapped on a perfectly cache-colored hugepage, so the trashing is the worst one can generate in those copies (cow of 4k page copies aren't so well colored so they trashes less, but again this results in software running faster after the page fault). Those prefault patches allowed things like a pte where post-cow pages were local 4k regular anon pages and the not-yet-cowed pte entries were pointing in the middle of some hugepage mapped read-only. If it doesn't payoff substantially with todays hardware it will payoff even less in the future with larger l2 caches, and the prefault logic would blot the VM a lot. If one is emebdded transparent_hugepage can be disabled during boot with sysfs or with the boot commandline parameter transparent_hugepage=0 (or transparent_hugepage=2 to restrict hugepages inside madvise regions) that will ensure not a single hugepage is allocated at boot time. It is simple enough to just disable transparent hugepage globally and let transparent hugepages be allocated selectively by applications in the MADV_HUGEPAGE region (both at page fault time, and if enabled with the collapse_huge_page too through the kernel daemon).
This patch supports only hugepages mapped in the pmd, archs that have smaller hugepages will not fit in this patch alone. Also some archs like power have certain tlb limits that prevents mixing different page size in the same regions so they will not fit in this framework that requires "graceful fallback" to basic PAGE_SIZE in case of physical memory fragmentation. hugetlbfs remains a perfect fit for those because its software limits happen to match the hardware limits. hugetlbfs also remains a perfect fit for hugepage sizes like 1GByte that cannot be hoped to be found not fragmented after a certain system uptime and that would be very expensive to defragment with relocation, so requiring reservation. hugetlbfs is the "reservation way", the point of transparent hugepages is not to have any reservation at all and maximizing the use of cache and hugepages at all times automatically.
Some performance result:
vmx andrea # LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib64/libhugetlbfs.so HUGETLB_MORECORE=yes HUGETLB_PATH=/mnt/huge/ ./largep ages3
memset page fault 1566023
memset tlb miss 453854
memset second tlb miss 453321
random access tlb miss 41635
random access second tlb miss 41658
vmx andrea # LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib64/libhugetlbfs.so HUGETLB_MORECORE=yes HUGETLB_PATH=/mnt/huge/ ./largepages3 memset page fault 1566471
memset tlb miss 453375
memset second tlb miss 453320
random access tlb miss 41636
random access second tlb miss 41637
vmx andrea # ./largepages3
memset page fault 1566642
memset tlb miss 453417
memset second tlb miss 453313
random access tlb miss 41630
random access second tlb miss 41647
vmx andrea # ./largepages3
memset page fault 1566872
memset tlb miss 453418
memset second tlb miss 453315
random access tlb miss 41618
random access second tlb miss 41659
vmx andrea # echo 0 > /proc/sys/vm/transparent_hugepage
vmx andrea # ./largepages3
memset page fault 2182476
memset tlb miss 460305
memset second tlb miss 460179
random access tlb miss 44483
random access second tlb miss 44186
vmx andrea # ./largepages3
memset page fault 2182791
memset tlb miss 460742
memset second tlb miss 459962
random access tlb miss 43981
random access second tlb miss 43988
============
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
#define SIZE (3UL*1024*1024*1024)
int main()
{
char *p = malloc(SIZE), *p2;
struct timeval before, after;
gettimeofday(&before, NULL);
memset(p, 0, SIZE);
gettimeofday(&after, NULL);
printf("memset page fault %Lu\n",
(after.tv_sec-before.tv_sec)*1000000UL +
after.tv_usec-before.tv_usec);
gettimeofday(&before, NULL);
memset(p, 0, SIZE);
gettimeofday(&after, NULL);
printf("memset tlb miss %Lu\n",
(after.tv_sec-before.tv_sec)*1000000UL +
after.tv_usec-before.tv_usec);
gettimeofday(&before, NULL);
memset(p, 0, SIZE);
gettimeofday(&after, NULL);
printf("memset second tlb miss %Lu\n",
(after.tv_sec-before.tv_sec)*1000000UL +
after.tv_usec-before.tv_usec);
gettimeofday(&before, NULL);
for (p2 = p; p2 < p+SIZE; p2 += 4096)
*p2 = 0;
gettimeofday(&after, NULL);
printf("random access tlb miss %Lu\n",
(after.tv_sec-before.tv_sec)*1000000UL +
after.tv_usec-before.tv_usec);
gettimeofday(&before, NULL);
for (p2 = p; p2 < p+SIZE; p2 += 4096)
*p2 = 0;
gettimeofday(&after, NULL);
printf("random access second tlb miss %Lu\n",
(after.tv_sec-before.tv_sec)*1000000UL +
after.tv_usec-before.tv_usec);
return 0;
}============
---
include/linux/huge_mm.h new file +124 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@ +#ifndef _LINUX_HUGE_MM_H +#define _LINUX_HUGE_MM_H + +extern int do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page (struct mm_struct *mm, +struct vm_area_struct *vma, +unsigned long address,pmd_t *pmd, +unsigned int flags); +extern int copy_huge_pmd (struct mm_struct *dst_mm,struct mm_struct *src_mm, +pmd_t *dst_pmd,pmd_t *src_pmd,unsigned long addr, +struct vm_area_struct *vma); +extern int do_huge_pmd_wp_page (struct mm_struct *mm,struct vm_area_struct *vma, +unsigned long address,pmd_t *pmd, +pmd_t orig_pmd); +extern pgtable_t get_pmd_huge_pte (struct mm_struct *mm); +extern struct page *follow_trans_huge_pmd (struct mm_struct *mm, +unsigned long addr, +pmd_t *pmd, +unsigned int flags); +extern int zap_huge_pmd (struct mmu_gather *tlb, +struct vm_area_struct *vma, +pmd_t *pmd); + +enum transparent_hugepage_flag { +TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_FLAG , +TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_REQ_MADV_FLAG , +TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEFRAG_FLAG , +TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEFRAG_REQ_MADV_FLAG , +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM +TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEBUG_COW_FLAG , +#endif +}; + +enum page_check_address_pmd_flag { +PAGE_CHECK_ADDRESS_PMD_FLAG , +PAGE_CHECK_ADDRESS_PMD_NOTSPLITTING_FLAG , +PAGE_CHECK_ADDRESS_PMD_SPLITTING_FLAG , +}; +extern pmd_t *page_check_address_pmd (struct page *page, +struct mm_struct *mm, +unsigned long address, +enum page_check_address_pmd_flag flag); + +#define transparent_hugepage_enabled (__vma) \ + (transparent_hugepage_flags & (1<<TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_FLAG) || \ + (transparent_hugepage_flags & \ + (1<<TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_REQ_MADV_FLAG) && \ + (__vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE)) +#define transparent_hugepage_defrag (__vma) \ + (transparent_hugepage_flags & \ + (1<<TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEFRAG_FLAG) || \ + (transparent_hugepage_flags & \ + (1<<TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEFRAG_REQ_MADV_FLAG) && \ + (__vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE)) +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM +#define transparent_hugepage_debug_cow () \ + (transparent_hugepage_flags & \ + (1<<TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEBUG_COW_FLAG)) +#else /* CONFIG_DEBUG_VM */ +#define transparent_hugepage_debug_cow () 0 +#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_VM */ + +#define HPAGE_PMD_SHIFT HPAGE_SHIFT +#define HPAGE_PMD_MASK HPAGE_MASK +#define HPAGE_PMD_SIZE HPAGE_SIZE + +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +extern unsigned long transparent_hugepage_flags; +extern int copy_pte_range (struct mm_struct *dst_mm,struct mm_struct *src_mm, +pmd_t *dst_pmd,pmd_t *src_pmd, +struct vm_area_struct *vma, +unsigned long addr,unsigned long end); +extern int handle_pte_fault (struct mm_struct *mm, +struct vm_area_struct *vma,unsigned long address, +pte_t *pte,pmd_t *pmd,unsigned int flags); +extern void __split_huge_page_mm (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long address, +pmd_t *pmd); +extern void __split_huge_page_vma (struct vm_area_struct *vma,pmd_t *pmd); +extern int split_huge_page (struct page *page); +#define split_huge_page_mm (__mm, __addr, __pmd) \ + do { \ + if (unlikely(pmd_trans_huge(*(__pmd)))) \ + __split_huge_page_mm(__mm, __addr, __pmd); \ + } while (0) +#define split_huge_page_vma (__vma, __pmd) \ + do { \ + if (unlikely(pmd_trans_huge(*(__pmd)))) \ + __split_huge_page_vma(__vma, __pmd); \ + } while (0) +#define wait_split_huge_page (__anon_vma, __pmd) \ + do { \ + smp_mb(); \ + spin_unlock_wait(&(__anon_vma)->lock); \ + smp_mb(); \ + VM_BUG_ON(pmd_trans_splitting(*(__pmd)) || \ + pmd_trans_huge(*(__pmd))); \ + } while (0) +#define HPAGE_PMD_ORDER (HPAGE_PMD_SHIFT-PAGE_SHIFT) +#define HPAGE_PMD_NR (1<<HPAGE_PMD_ORDER) +#if HPAGE_PMD_ORDER >MAX_ORDER +#error "hugepages can't be allocated by the buddy allocator" +#endif + +extern unsigned long vma_address (struct page *page,struct vm_area_struct *vma); +static inline int PageTransHuge (struct page *page) +{ +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page)); +return PageHead (page); +} +#else /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */ +#define transparent_hugepage_flags 0UL +static inline int split_huge_page (struct page *page) +{ +return 0 ; +} +#define split_huge_page_mm (__mm, __addr, __pmd) \ + do { } while (0) +#define split_huge_page_vma (__vma, __pmd) \ + do { } while (0) +#define wait_split_huge_page (__anon_vma, __pmd) \ + do { } while (0) +#define PageTransHuge (page) 0 +#endif /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */ + +#endif /* _LINUX_HUGE_MM_H */
include/linux/mm.h +4 -0
@@ -106,6 +106,9 @@ extern unsigned int kobjsize(const void#define VM_SAO 0x20000000/* Strong Access Ordering (powerpc) */ #define VM_PFN_AT_MMAP 0x40000000/* PFNMAP vma that is fully mapped at mmap time */ #define VM_MERGEABLE 0x80000000/* KSM may merge identical pages */ +#if BITS_PER_LONG >32 +#define VM_HUGEPAGE 0x100000000UL/* MADV_HUGEPAGE marked this vma */ +#endif #ifndef VM_STACK_DEFAULT_FLAGS /* arch can override this */ #define VM_STACK_DEFAULT_FLAGS VM_DATA_DEFAULT_FLAGS
@@ -234,6 +237,7 @@ struct inode;* files which need it (119 of them) */ #include <linux/page-flags.h> +#include <linux/huge_mm.h> /* * Methods to modify the page usage count.
include/linux/mm_inline.h +10 -3
@@ -20,11 +20,18 @@ static inline int page_is_file_cache(str }static inline void +__add_page_to_lru_list (struct zone *zone,struct page *page,enum lru_list l, +struct list_head *head) +{ +list_add (&page->lru, head); +__inc_zone_state (zone,NR_LRU_BASE + l); +mem_cgroup_add_lru_list (page, l); +} + +static inline void add_page_to_lru_list (struct zone *zone,struct page *page,enum lru_list l) { -list_add (&page->lru, &zone->lru[l].list); -__inc_zone_state (zone,NR_LRU_BASE + l); -mem_cgroup_add_lru_list (page, l); +__add_page_to_lru_list (zone, page, l, &zone->lru[l].list); } static inline void
include/linux/swap.h +2 -0
@@ -205,6 +205,8 @@ extern unsigned int nr_free_pagecache_pa/* linux/mm/swap.c */ extern void __lru_cache_add (struct page *,enum lru_list lru);extern void lru_cache_add_lru (struct page *,enum lru_list lru); +extern void lru_add_page_tail (struct zone * zone, +struct page *page,struct page *page_tail);extern void activate_page (struct page *);extern void mark_page_accessed (struct page *);extern void lru_add_drain (void );
mm/Makefile +1 -0
@@ -40,3 +40,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MEMORY_FAILURE) += memory-f obj-$(CONFIG_HWPOISON_INJECT) += hwpoison-inject.o obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK) += kmemleak.o obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK_TEST) += kmemleak-test.o +obj-$(CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE) += huge_memory.o
mm/huge_memory.c new file +847 -0
847 lines not on this page · raw message
mm/memory.c +60 -7
119 lines not on this page · raw message
mm/rmap.c +36 -23
93 lines not on this page · raw message
mm/swap.c +37 -0
@@ -459,6 +459,43 @@ void __pagevec_release(struct pagevec *pEXPORT_SYMBOL (__pagevec_release); +/* used by __split_huge_page_refcount() */ +void lru_add_page_tail (struct zone * zone, +struct page *page,struct page *page_tail) +{ +int active; +enum lru_list lru; +const int file =0 ; +struct list_head *head; + +VM_BUG_ON (!PageHead (page)); +VM_BUG_ON (PageCompound (page_tail)); +VM_BUG_ON (PageLRU (page_tail)); +VM_BUG_ON (!spin_is_locked (&zone->lru_lock)); + +SetPageLRU (page_tail); + +if (page_evictable (page_tail,NULL )) { +if (PageActive (page)) { +SetPageActive (page_tail); + active =1 ; + lru =LRU_ACTIVE_ANON ; + }else { + active =0 ; + lru =LRU_INACTIVE_ANON ; + } +update_page_reclaim_stat (zone, page_tail, file, active); +if (likely (PageLRU (page))) + head = page->lru.prev; +else + head = &zone->lru[lru].list; +__add_page_to_lru_list (zone, page_tail, lru, head); + }else { +SetPageUnevictable (page); +add_page_to_lru_list (zone, page,LRU_UNEVICTABLE ); + } +} +/* * Add the passed pages to the LRU, then drop the caller's refcount * on them. Reinitialises the caller's pagevec.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 add pmd paravirt ops
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Paravirt ops pmd_update/pmd_update_defer/pmd_set_at. Not all might be necessary (vmware needs pmd_update, Xen needs set_pmd_at, nobody needs pmd_update_defer), but this is to keep full simmetry with pte paravirt ops, which looks cleaner and simpler from a common code POV.
---
arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h +21 -0
@@ -449,6 +449,11 @@ static inline void pte_update(struct mm_ {PVOP_VCALL3 (pv_mmu_ops.pte_update, mm, addr, ptep); } +static inline void pmd_update (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr, +pmd_t *pmdp) +{ +PVOP_VCALL3 (pv_mmu_ops.pmd_update, mm, addr, pmdp); +}static inline void pte_update_defer (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr,pte_t *ptep)
@@ -456,6 +461,12 @@ static inline void pte_update_defer(struPVOP_VCALL3 (pv_mmu_ops.pte_update_defer, mm, addr, ptep); } +static inline void pmd_update_defer (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr, +pmd_t *pmdp) +{ +PVOP_VCALL3 (pv_mmu_ops.pmd_update_defer, mm, addr, pmdp); +} +static inline pte_t __pte (pteval_t val) {pteval_t ret;
@@ -557,6 +568,16 @@ static inline void set_pte_at(struct mm_PVOP_VCALL4 (pv_mmu_ops.set_pte_at, mm, addr, ptep, pte.pte); } +static inline void set_pmd_at (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr, +pmd_t *pmdp,pmd_t pmd) +{ +if (sizeof (pmdval_t) >sizeof (long )) +/* 5 arg words */ + pv_mmu_ops.set_pmd_at (mm, addr, pmdp, pmd); +else +PVOP_VCALL4 (pv_mmu_ops.set_pmd_at, mm, addr, pmdp, pmd.pmd); +} +static inline void set_pmd (pmd_t *pmdp,pmd_t pmd) {pmdval_t val =native_pmd_val (pmd);
arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h +6 -0
@@ -266,10 +266,16 @@ struct pv_mmu_ops {void (*set_pte_at)(struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr,pte_t *ptep,pte_t pteval);void (*set_pmd)(pmd_t *pmdp,pmd_t pmdval); +void (*set_pmd_at)(struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr, +pmd_t *pmdp,pmd_t pmdval);void (*pte_update)(struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr,pte_t *ptep);void (*pte_update_defer)(struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr,pte_t *ptep); +void (*pmd_update)(struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr, +pmd_t *pmdp); +void (*pmd_update_defer)(struct mm_struct *mm, +unsigned long addr,pmd_t *pmdp);pte_t (*ptep_modify_prot_start)(struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr,pte_t *ptep);
arch/x86/kernel/paravirt.c +3 -0
@@ -422,8 +422,11 @@ struct pv_mmu_ops pv_mmu_ops = { .set_pte = native_set_pte, .set_pte_at = native_set_pte_at, .set_pmd = native_set_pmd, + .set_pmd_at = native_set_pmd_at, .pte_update = paravirt_nop, .pte_update_defer = paravirt_nop, + .pmd_update = paravirt_nop, + .pmd_update_defer = paravirt_nop, .ptep_modify_prot_start = __ptep_modify_prot_start, .ptep_modify_prot_commit = __ptep_modify_prot_commit,
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 add pmd mangling generic functions
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Some are needed to build but not actually used on archs not supporting transparent hugepages. Others like pmdp_clear_flush are used by x86 too.
---
include/asm-generic/pgtable.h +66 -0
@@ -23,6 +23,19 @@ } \ __changed; \ }) + +#define pmdp_set_access_flags (__vma, __address, __pmdp, __entry, __dirty) \ + ({ \ + int __changed = !pmd_same(*(__pmdp), __entry); \ + VM_BUG_ON((__address) & ~HPAGE_PMD_MASK); \ + if (__changed) { \ + set_pmd_at((__vma)->vm_mm, __address, __pmdp, \ + __entry); \ + flush_tlb_range(__vma, __address, \ + (__address) + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE); \ + } \ + __changed; \ + })#endif #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_TEST_AND_CLEAR_YOUNG
@@ -37,6 +50,17 @@ (__ptep), pte_mkold(__pte)); \ r; \ }) +#define pmdp_test_and_clear_young (__vma, __address, __pmdp) \ +({ \ + pmd_t __pmd = *(__pmdp); \ + int r = 1; \ + if (!pmd_young(__pmd)) \ + r = 0; \ + else \ + set_pmd_at((__vma)->vm_mm, (__address), \ + (__pmdp), pmd_mkold(__pmd)); \ + r; \ +})#endif #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_CLEAR_YOUNG_FLUSH
@@ -48,6 +72,16 @@flush_tlb_page (__vma, __address); \ __young; \ }) +#define pmdp_clear_flush_young (__vma, __address, __pmdp) \ +({ \ + int __young; \ + VM_BUG_ON((__address) & ~HPAGE_PMD_MASK); \ + __young = pmdp_test_and_clear_young(__vma, __address, __pmdp); \ + if (__young) \ + flush_tlb_range(__vma, __address, \ + (__address) + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE); \ + __young; \ +})#endif #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_GET_AND_CLEAR
@@ -57,6 +91,13 @@pte_clear ((__mm), (__address), (__ptep)); \ __pte; \ }) + +#define pmdp_get_and_clear (__mm, __address, __pmdp) \ +({ \ + pmd_t __pmd = *(__pmdp); \ + pmd_clear((__mm), (__address), (__pmdp)); \ + __pmd; \ +})#endif #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_GET_AND_CLEAR_FULL
@@ -88,6 +129,15 @@ do { \flush_tlb_page (__vma, __address); \ __pte; \ }) + +#define pmdp_clear_flush (__vma, __address, __pmdp) \ +({ \ + pmd_t __pmd; \ + VM_BUG_ON((__address) & ~HPAGE_PMD_MASK); \ + __pmd = pmdp_get_and_clear((__vma)->vm_mm, __address, __pmdp); \ + flush_tlb_range(__vma, __address, (__address) + HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);\ + __pmd; \ +})#endif #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_SET_WRPROTECT
@@ -97,10 +147,26 @@ static inline void ptep_set_wrprotect(stpte_t old_pte = *ptep;set_pte_at (mm, address, ptep,pte_wrprotect (old_pte)); } + +static inline void pmdp_set_wrprotect (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long address,pmd_t *pmdp) +{ +pmd_t old_pmd = *pmdp; +set_pmd_at (mm, address, pmdp,pmd_wrprotect (old_pmd)); +} + +#define pmdp_splitting_flush (__vma, __address, __pmdp) \ +({ \ + pmd_t __pmd = pmd_mksplitting(*(__pmdp)); \ + VM_BUG_ON((__address) & ~HPAGE_PMD_MASK); \ + set_pmd_at((__vma)->vm_mm, __address, __pmdp, __pmd); \ +/* tlb flush only to serialize against gup-fast */ \ +flush_tlb_range (__vma, __address, (__address) +HPAGE_PMD_SIZE );\ +})#endif #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SAME#define pte_same (A ,B ) (pte_val(A) == pte_val(B)) +#define pmd_same (A ,B ) (pmd_val(A) == pmd_val(B))#endif #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PAGE_TEST_DIRTY
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 khugepaged
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Add khugepaged to relocate fragmented pages into hugepages if new hugepages become available. (this is indipendent of the defrag logic that will have to make new hugepages available)
---
include/linux/huge_mm.h +9 -4
@@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ enum transparent_hugepage_flag {TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_REQ_MADV_FLAG ,TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEFRAG_FLAG ,TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEFRAG_REQ_MADV_FLAG , +TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_KHUGEPAGED_FLAG , +TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_KHUGEPAGED_REQ_MADV_FLAG , #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEBUG_COW_FLAG, #endif
@@ -45,12 +47,14 @@ extern pmd_t *page_check_address_pmd(str (transparent_hugepage_flags & \ (1<<TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_REQ_MADV_FLAG) && \ (__vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE)) -#define transparent_hugepage_defrag (__vma) \ +#define __transparent_hugepage_defrag (__in_madv) \ (transparent_hugepage_flags & \ (1<<TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEFRAG_FLAG) || \ (transparent_hugepage_flags & \ (1<<TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEFRAG_REQ_MADV_FLAG) && \ - (__vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE)) + (__in_madv))) +#define transparent_hugepage_defrag (__vma) \ + __transparent_hugepage_defrag((__vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE)#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_VM #define transparent_hugepage_debug_cow () \ (transparent_hugepage_flags & \
@@ -101,7 +105,7 @@ extern int split_huge_page(struct page *#endif extern unsigned long vma_address (struct page *page,struct vm_area_struct *vma); -extern int hugepage_madvise (unsigned long *vm_flags); +extern int hugepage_madvise (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long *vm_flags);static inline int PageTransHuge (struct page *page) {VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page));
@@ -120,7 +124,8 @@ static inline int split_huge_page(struct#define wait_split_huge_page (__anon_vma, __pmd) \ do { } while (0)#define PageTransHuge (page) 0 -static inline int hugepage_madvise (unsigned long *vm_flags) +static inline int hugepage_madvise (struct mm_struct *mm, +unsigned long *vm_flags) {BUG_ON (0 );return 0 ;
include/linux/khugepaged.h new file +32 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +#ifndef _LINUX_KHUGEPAGED_H +#define _LINUX_KHUGEPAGED_H + +#include <linux/sched.h> /* MMF_VM_HUGEPAGE */ + +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE +extern int __khugepaged_enter (struct mm_struct *mm); +extern void __khugepaged_exit (struct mm_struct *mm); + +static inline int khugepaged_fork (struct mm_struct *mm,struct mm_struct *oldmm) +{ +if (test_bit (MMF_VM_HUGEPAGE , &oldmm->flags)) +return __khugepaged_enter (mm); +return 0 ; +} + +static inline void khugepaged_exit (struct mm_struct *mm) +{ +if (test_bit (MMF_VM_HUGEPAGE , &mm->flags)) +__khugepaged_exit (mm); +} +#else /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */ +static inline int khugepaged_fork (struct mm_struct *mm,struct mm_struct *oldmm) +{ +return 0 ; +} +static inline void khugepaged_exit (struct mm_struct *mm) +{ +} +#endif /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */ + +#endif /* _LINUX_KHUGEPAGED_H */
include/linux/sched.h +1 -0
@@ -482,6 +482,7 @@ extern int get_dumpable(struct mm_struct#endif /* leave room for more dump flags */ #define MMF_VM_MERGEABLE 16/* KSM may merge identical pages */ +#define MMF_VM_HUGEPAGE 17/* set when VM_HUGEPAGE is set on vma */ #define MMF_INIT_MASK (MMF_DUMPABLE_MASK | MMF_DUMP_FILTER_MASK)
kernel/fork.c +5 -0
@@ -65,6 +65,7 @@#include <linux/perf_event.h> #include <linux/posix-timers.h> #include <linux/user-return-notifier.h> +#include <linux/khugepaged.h> #include <asm/pgtable.h> #include <asm/pgalloc.h>
@@ -306,6 +307,9 @@ static int dup_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm retval =ksm_fork (mm, oldmm);if (retval) goto out; + retval =khugepaged_fork (mm, oldmm); +if (retval) + goto out;for (mpnt = oldmm->mmap; mpnt; mpnt = mpnt->vm_next) {struct file *file;
@@ -515,6 +519,7 @@ void mmput(struct mm_struct *mm)if (atomic_dec_and_test (&mm->mm_users)) {exit_aio (mm);ksm_exit (mm); +khugepaged_exit (mm);/* must run before exit_mmap */ exit_mmap (mm);set_mm_exe_file (mm,NULL );if (!list_empty (&mm->mmlist)) {
mm/huge_memory.c +899 -8
955 lines not on this page · raw message
mm/madvise.c +1 -1
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static long madvise_behavior(struct vm_a goto out;break ;case MADV_HUGEPAGE : - error =hugepage_madvise (&new_flags); + error =hugepage_madvise (vma->vm_mm, &new_flags);if (error) goto out;break ;
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 alter compound get_page/put_page
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Alter compound get_page/put_page to keep references on subpages too, in order to allow __split_huge_page_refcount to split an hugepage even while subpages have been pinned by one of the get_user_pages() variants.
---
arch/powerpc/mm/gup.c +8 -0
@@ -43,6 +43,14 @@ static noinline int gup_pte_range(pmd_t page =pte_page (pte);if (!page_cache_get_speculative (page))return 0 ; +if (PageTail (page)) { +/* +* __split_huge_page_refcount() cannot run +* from under us. +*/ +VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->_count) <0 ); +atomic_inc (&page->_count); + }if (unlikely (pte_val (pte) !=pte_val (*ptep))) {put_page (page);return 0 ;
arch/x86/mm/gup.c +8 -0
@@ -128,6 +128,14 @@ static noinline int gup_huge_pmd(pmd_t p do { VM_BUG_ON(compound_head(page) != head); pages[*nr] = page; + if (PageTail(page)) { + /* + * __split_huge_page_refcount() cannot run + * from under us. + */ + VM_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&page->_count) < 0); + atomic_inc(&page->_count); + } (*nr)++; page++; refs++;
include/linux/mm.h +7 -2
@@ -319,9 +319,14 @@ static inline int page_count(struct pagestatic inline void get_page (struct page *page) { - page =compound_head (page); -VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->_count) ==0 ); +VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->_count) < !PageTail (page));atomic_inc (&page->_count); +if (unlikely (PageTail (page))) { +VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->first_page->_count) <=0 ); +atomic_inc (&page->first_page->_count); +/* __split_huge_page_refcount can't run under get_page */ +VM_BUG_ON (!PageTail (page)); + } }static inline struct page *virt_to_head_page (const void *x)
include/linux/page-flags.h +2 -1
@@ -409,7 +409,8 @@ static inline void __ClearPageTail(struc1 << PG_private |1 << PG_private_2 | \1 << PG_buddy |1 << PG_writeback |1 << PG_reserved | \1 << PG_slab |1 << PG_swapcache |1 << PG_active | \ - 1 << PG_unevictable | __PG_MLOCKED | __PG_HWPOISON) +1 << PG_unevictable | __PG_MLOCKED | __PG_HWPOISON | \ + 1 << PG_compound_lock)/* * Flags checked when a page is prepped for return by the page allocator.
mm/swap.c +70 -7
94 lines not on this page · raw message
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 03 of 30] alter compound get_page/put_page
Quoted 32 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
From: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Alter compound get_page/put_page to keep references on subpages too, in order to allow
__split_huge_page_refcountto split an hugepage even while subpages have been pinned by one of theget_user_pages()variants.Signed-off-by Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>---
arch/powerpc/mm/gup.c +8
-0@@ -43,6 +43,14 @@ static noinline int gup_pte_range(pmd_t page =pte_page (pte);if (!page_cache_get_speculative (page))return 0 ; +if (PageTail (page)) { +/* +* __split_huge_page_refcount() cannot run +* from under us. +*/ +VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->_count) <0 ); +atomic_inc (&page->_count); + }if (unlikely (pte_val (pte) !=pte_val (*ptep))) {put_page (page);return 0 ;arch/x86/mm/gup.c +0
-0@@ -128,6 +128,14 @@ static noinline int gup_huge_pmd(pmd_t p do {
arch/x86/mm/gup.c static noinline int gup_huge_pmd(pmd_t p · line 138
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/mm/gup.c +8
-0VM_BUG_ON (compound_head (page) != head); pages[*nr] = page; +if (PageTail (page)) { +/* +* __split_huge_page_refcount() cannot run +* from under us. +*/ +VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->_count) <0 ); +atomic_inc (&page->_count); + }
Christoph kinda has a point here. The gup code is going to be a pretty hot path for some people, and this does add a bunch of atomics that some people will have no need for.
It's also a decent place to put a helper function anyway.
void pin_huge_page_tail(struct page *page)
{
/*
* This ensures that a __split_huge_page_refcount()
* running underneath us cannot
*/
VM_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&page->_count) < 0);
atomic_inc(&page->_count);
}It'll keep us from putting the same comment in too many arches, I guess
arch/x86/mm/gup.c static noinline int gup_huge_pmd(pmd_t p
Quoted 5 lines
arch/x86/mm/gup.c +1
-2static inline void get_page (struct page *page) { - page =compound_head (page); -VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->_count) ==0 ); +VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->_count) < !PageTail (page));
Hmm.
if
arch/x86/mm/gup.c
Quoted 8 lines
arch/x86/mm/gup.c +6
-0atomic_inc (&page->_count); +if (unlikely (PageTail (page))) { +VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->first_page->_count) <=0 ); +atomic_inc (&page->first_page->_count); +/* __split_huge_page_refcount can't run under get_page */ +VM_BUG_ON (!PageTail (page)); + } }
Are you hoping to catch a race in progress with the second VM_BUG_ON() here? Maybe the comment should say, "detect race with __split_huge_page_refcount".
include/linux/page-flags.h static inline void __ClearPageTail(struc · line 413
Quoted 11 lines
static inline struct page *virt_to_head_page(const void *x)
include/linux/page-flags.h +2
-1@@ -409,7 +409,8 @@ static inline void __ClearPageTail(struc1 << PG_private |1 << PG_private_2 | \1 << PG_buddy |1 << PG_writeback |1 << PG_reserved | \1 << PG_slab |1 << PG_swapcache |1 << PG_active | \ - 1 << PG_unevictable | __PG_MLOCKED | __PG_HWPOISON) +1 << PG_unevictable | __PG_MLOCKED | __PG_HWPOISON | \ + 1 << PG_compound_lock)
Nit: should probably go in the last patch.
Quoted 81 lines
include/linux/page-flags.h +0
-0/* * Flags checked when a page is prepped for return by the page allocator. mm/swap.c +61
-6@@ -55,17 +55,80 @@ static void __page_cache_release(structdel_page_from_lru (zone, page);spin_unlock_irqrestore (&zone->lru_lock, flags); } +} + +static void __put_single_page (struct page *page) +{ +__page_cache_release (page);free_hot_page (page); } +static void __put_compound_page (struct page *page) +{ +compound_page_dtor *dtor; + +__page_cache_release (page); + dtor =get_compound_page_dtor (page); + (*dtor)(page); +} +static void put_compound_page (struct page *page) { - page =compound_head (page); -if (put_page_testzero (page)) { -compound_page_dtor *dtor; - - dtor =get_compound_page_dtor (page); - (*dtor)(page); +if (unlikely (PageTail (page))) { +/* __split_huge_page_refcount can run under us */ +struct page *page_head = page->first_page; +smp_rmb (); +if (likely (PageTail (page) &&get_page_unless_zero (page_head))) { +if (unlikely (!PageHead (page_head))) { +/* PageHead is cleared after PageTail */ +smp_rmb (); +VM_BUG_ON (PageTail (page)); + goto out_put_head; + } +/* +* Only run compound_lock on a valid PageHead, +* after having it pinned with +* get_page_unless_zero() above. +*/ +smp_mb (); +/* page_head wasn't a dangling pointer */ +compound_lock (page_head); +if (unlikely (!PageTail (page))) { +/* __split_huge_page_refcount run before us */ +compound_unlock (page_head); + out_put_head: +put_page (page_head); + out_put_single: +if (put_page_testzero (page)) +__put_single_page (page); +return ; + } +VM_BUG_ON (page_head != page->first_page); +/* +* We can release the refcount taken by +* get_page_unless_zero now that +* split_huge_page_refcount is blocked on the +* compound_lock. +*/ +if (put_page_testzero (page_head)) +VM_BUG_ON (1 ); +/* __split_huge_page_refcount will wait now */ +VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->_count) <=0 ); +atomic_dec (&page->_count); +VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page_head->_count) <=0 ); +if (put_page_testzero (page_head)) +__put_compound_page (page_head); +else +compound_unlock (page_head); +return ;
mm/swap.c static void __page_cache_release(struct · line 133
Quoted 10 lines
mm/swap.c +8
-0+ }else +/* page_head is a dangling pointer */ + goto out_put_single; + }else if (put_page_testzero (page)) { +if (PageHead (page)) +__put_compound_page (page); +else +__put_single_page (page); } }
That looks functional to me, although the code is pretty darn dense. :) But, I'm not sure there's a better way to do it.
-- Dave
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 03 of 30] alter compound get_page/put_page
Quoted 16 lines · Dave Hansen
Christoph kinda has a point here. The gup code is going to be a pretty hot path for some people, and this does add a bunch of atomics that some people will have no need for.
It's also a decent place to put a helper function anyway.
void
pin_huge_page_tail(struct page *page){ /* * This ensures that a __split_huge_page_refcount() * running underneath us cannot */ VM_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&page->_count) < 0); atomic_inc(&page->_count); }
Quoted 1 line
It'll keep us from putting the same comment in too many arches, I guess
We can replace the compound_lock with a branch, by setting a PG_trans_huge on all compound pages allocated by huge_memory.c, that would only benefit gup on hugetlbfs (and it'll add the cost of one branch to gup on transparent hugepages, that's why I didn't do that). But I can add it. Note the compound_lock is granular on a cacheline already hot and exclusive read-write on the l1 cache, not like the mmap_sem (that gup_fast avoids), but surely an atomic op is more costly than just a branch...
Quoted 7 lines
Review
Quoted 5 lines
static inline void
get_page(struct page *page)
{(quoted diff) +1
-2- page = compound_head(page); - VM_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&page->_count) == 0); + VM_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&page->_count) < !PageTail(page));Hmm.
This means, if the page is not a tail page, count must be >= 1 (, which is more strict and more correct than the already existing check == 0 that should really be <= 0). If a page is a tail page, then the bugcheck is only for < 0, because tail pages are only pinned by gup and if there is no gup going on, there is no pin either on tail pages.
Quoted 15 lines
if
Review
Quoted 8 lines
(quoted diff) +6
-0atomic_inc(&page->_count); + if (unlikely(PageTail(page))) { + VM_BUG_ON(atomic_read(&page->first_page->_count) <= 0); + atomic_inc(&page->first_page->_count); + /* __split_huge_page_refcount can't run under get_page */ + VM_BUG_ON(!PageTail(page)); + } }Are you hoping to catch a race in progress with the second
VM_BUG_ON()here? Maybe the comment should say, "detect race with__split_huge_page_refcount".
Exactly. I think the current comment was explicit enough. But frankly this is pure paranoid and I'm thinking that gcc can eliminate the bugcheck entirely because atomic_inc doesn't clobber "memory" so I'll remove the bugcheck instead, but leaving the current comment.
include/linux/mm.h +5 -2
@@ -322,10 +322,13 @@ static inline void get_page(struct pageVM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->_count) < !PageTail (page));atomic_inc (&page->_count);if (unlikely (PageTail (page))) { +/* +* This is safe only because +* __split_huge_page_refcount can't run under +* get_page(). +*/ VM_BUG_ON (atomic_read (&page->first_page->_count) <=0 );atomic_inc (&page->first_page->_count); -/* __split_huge_page_refcount can't run under get_page */ -VM_BUG_ON (!PageTail (page)); } }
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 5 lines
static inline struct page *virt_to_head_page(const void *x)
include/linux/page-flags.h +0
-0@@ -409,7 +409,8 @@ static inline void __ClearPageTail(struc
Quoted 8 lines
include/linux/page-flags.h static inline void __ClearPageTail(struc · line 413
Quoted 6 lines
include/linux/page-flags.h +2
-11 << PG_private |1 << PG_private_2 | \1 << PG_buddy |1 << PG_writeback |1 << PG_reserved | \1 << PG_slab |1 << PG_swapcache |1 << PG_active | \ - 1 << PG_unevictable | __PG_MLOCKED | __PG_HWPOISON) +1 << PG_unevictable | __PG_MLOCKED | __PG_HWPOISON | \ + 1 << PG_compound_lock)Nit: should probably go in the last patch.
Why? If you apply this single patch we already want to immediately detect if somebody is running compund_lock but forgetting to compound_unlock before freeing the page. Just like with PG_lock. There may be other nits on how I tried to splited the original monolith without having to rewrite lots of intermediate code, but this looks ok or at least I don't get why to move it elsewhere ;).
Quoted 2 lines
That looks functional to me, although the code is pretty darn dense. :) But, I'm not sure there's a better way to do it.
I'm not sure either.
If you or Christoph or anybody else asks me to add a PG_trans_huge set by huge_memory.c immediately after allocating the hugepage, and to make the above put_page/get_page tail pinning and compound_lock entirely conditional to PG_trans_huge being set I'll do it immediately. As said it will replace around 2 atomic ops on each gup/put_page run on a tail page allocated in hugetlbfs (not through the transparent hugepage framework) with a branch, so it will practically eliminate the overhead caused to O_DIRECT over hugetlbfs. I'm not doing it unless explicitly asked because:
1) it will make code even a little more dense
2) it will microslowdown transparent hugepage gup (which means O_DIRECT over transparent hugepage and the kvm minor fault will have to pay one more branch than necessary)
It might be a worthwhile tradeoff but I'm not big believer in hugetlbfs optimization (unless they're entirely self contained) so that's why I'm not inclined to do it unless explicitly asked. I think we should rather think on how to speedup gup on transparent hugepage, and secondly we should add transparent hugepage support starting with tmpfs probably.
As you guessed, I also couldn't think of a more efficient way than to use this compound_lock on tail pages to allow the proper atomic adjust of the tail page refcounts in __split_huge_page_refcount.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 clear_copy_huge_page
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Move the copy/clear_huge_page functions to common code to share between hugetlb.c and huge_memory.c.
---
include/linux/mm.h +9 -0
@@ -1379,5 +1379,14 @@ extern void shake_page(struct page *p, iextern atomic_long_t mce_bad_pages;extern int soft_offline_page (struct page *page,int flags); +#if defined(CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE ) || defined(CONFIG_HUGETLBFS ) +extern void clear_huge_page (struct page *page, +unsigned long addr, +unsigned int pages_per_huge_page); +extern void copy_huge_page (struct page *dst,struct page *src, +unsigned long addr,struct vm_area_struct *vma, +unsigned int pages_per_huge_page); +#endif /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE || CONFIG_HUGETLBFS */ +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */ #endif /* _LINUX_MM_H */
mm/hugetlb.c +2 -65
79 lines not on this page · raw message
mm/memory.c +70 -0
73 lines not on this page · raw message
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 clear compound mapping
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Clear compound mapping for anonymous compound pages like it already happens for regular anonymous pages.
---
mm/page_alloc.c +2 -0
@@ -584,6 +584,8 @@ static void __free_pages_ok(struct pagekmemcheck_free_shadow (page, order); +if (PageAnon (page)) + page->mapping =NULL ;for (i =0 ; i < (1 << order) ; ++i) bad +=free_pages_check (page + i);if (bad)
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 04 of 30] clear compound mapping
Quoted 7 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Clear compound mapping for anonymous compound pages like it already happens for regular anonymous pages.
mm/page_alloc.c static void __free_pages_ok(struct page · line 591
Quoted 8 lines
mm/page_alloc.c +2
-0@@ -584,6 +584,8 @@ static void __free_pages_ok(struct pagekmemcheck_free_shadow (page, order); +if (PageAnon (page)) + page->mapping =NULL ;for (i =0 ; i < (1 << order) ; ++i) bad +=free_pages_check (page + i);if (bad)
This one may at least need a bit of an enhanced patch description. I didn't immediately remember that __free_pages_ok() is only actually called for compound pages.
Would it make more sense to pull the page->mapping=NULL out of free_hot_cold_page(), and just put a single one in __free_pages()?
I guess we'd also need one in free_compound_page() since it calls __free_pages_ok() directly. But, if this patch were putting modifying free_compound_page() it would at least be super obvious what was going on.
-- Dave
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 04 of 30] clear compound mapping
Quoted 11 lines · Dave Hansen
Quoted 10 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Clear compound mapping for anonymous compound pages like it already happens for regular anonymous pages.
mm/page_alloc.c +0
-0@@ -584,6 +584,8 @@ static void __free_pages_ok(struct pagekmemcheck_free_shadow (page, order);
Quoted 9 lines
mm/page_alloc.c static void __free_pages_ok(struct page · line 591
Quoted 5 lines
mm/page_alloc.c +2
-0+if (PageAnon (page)) + page->mapping =NULL ;for (i =0 ; i < (1 << order) ; ++i) bad +=free_pages_check (page + i);if (bad)This one may at least need a bit of an enhanced patch description. I didn't immediately remember that
__free_pages_ok()is only actually called for compound pages.
In short the problem is that the mapping is only cleared if page is freed through free_hot_cold_page. So we've to clear it also if we don't pass through free_hot_cold_page.
Quoted 7 lines
Would it make more sense to pull the page->mapping=NULL out of
free_hot_cold_page(), and just put a single one in__free_pages()?I guess we'd also need one in
free_compound_page()since it calls__free_pages_ok()directly. But, if this patch were putting modifyingfree_compound_page()it would at least be super obvious what was going on.
I could as well set_compound_page_dtor and have my own callback that calls free_compound_page. Or I can move it to __free_one_page and remove the one from free_hot_cold_page. What do you prefer?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 kvm mmu transparent hugepage support
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Marcelo Tosatti <[email protected]>
This should work for both hugetlbfs and transparent hugepages.
---
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c +9 -0
@@ -489,6 +489,15 @@ static int host_mapping_level(struct kvm out:up_read (¤t->mm->mmap_sem); +/* check for transparent hugepages */ +if (page_size ==PAGE_SIZE ) { +struct page *page =gfn_to_page (kvm, gfn); + +if (!is_error_page (page) &&PageHead (page)) + page_size =KVM_HPAGE_SIZE (2 ); +kvm_release_page_clean (page); + } +for (i =PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL ; i < (PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL +KVM_NR_PAGE_SIZES ); ++i) {if (page_size >=KVM_HPAGE_SIZE (i))
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 add pmd mangling functions to x86
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
Add needed pmd mangling functions with simmetry with their pte counterparts. pmdp_freeze_flush is the only exception only present on the pmd side and it's needed to serialize the VM against split_huge_page, it simply atomically clears the present bit in the same way pmdp_clear_flush_young atomically clears the accessed bit (and both need to flush the tlb to make it effective, which is mandatory to happen synchronously for pmdp_freeze_flush).
---
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h +86 -1
@@ -95,11 +95,21 @@ static inline int pte_young(pte_t pte)return pte_flags (pte) & _PAGE_ACCESSED; } +static inline int pmd_young (pmd_t pmd) +{ +return pmd_flags (pmd) & _PAGE_ACCESSED; +} +static inline int pte_write (pte_t pte) {return pte_flags (pte) & _PAGE_RW; } +static inline int pmd_write (pmd_t pmd) +{ +return pmd_flags (pmd) & _PAGE_RW; +} +static inline int pte_file (pte_t pte) {return pte_flags (pte) & _PAGE_FILE;
@@ -150,6 +160,13 @@ static inline pte_t pte_set_flags(pte_treturn native_make_pte (v | set); } +static inline pmd_t pmd_set_flags (pmd_t pmd,pmdval_t set) +{ +pmdval_t v =native_pmd_val (pmd); + +return native_make_pmd (v | set); +} +static inline pte_t pte_clear_flags (pte_t pte,pteval_t clear) {pteval_t v =native_pte_val (pte);
@@ -157,6 +174,13 @@ static inline pte_t pte_clear_flags(pte_return native_make_pte (v & ~clear); } +static inline pmd_t pmd_clear_flags (pmd_t pmd,pmdval_t clear) +{ +pmdval_t v =native_pmd_val (pmd); + +return native_make_pmd (v & ~clear); +} +static inline pte_t pte_mkclean (pte_t pte) {return pte_clear_flags (pte, _PAGE_DIRTY);
@@ -167,11 +191,21 @@ static inline pte_t pte_mkold(pte_t pte)return pte_clear_flags (pte, _PAGE_ACCESSED); } +static inline pmd_t pmd_mkold (pmd_t pmd) +{ +return pmd_clear_flags (pmd, _PAGE_ACCESSED); +} +static inline pte_t pte_wrprotect (pte_t pte) {return pte_clear_flags (pte, _PAGE_RW); } +static inline pmd_t pmd_wrprotect (pmd_t pmd) +{ +return pmd_clear_flags (pmd, _PAGE_RW); +} +static inline pte_t pte_mkexec (pte_t pte) {return pte_clear_flags (pte, _PAGE_NX);
@@ -182,16 +216,36 @@ static inline pte_t pte_mkdirty(pte_t ptreturn pte_set_flags (pte, _PAGE_DIRTY); } +static inline pmd_t pmd_mkdirty (pmd_t pmd) +{ +return pmd_set_flags (pmd, _PAGE_DIRTY); +} + +static inline pmd_t pmd_mkhuge (pmd_t pmd) +{ +return pmd_set_flags (pmd, _PAGE_PSE); +} +static inline pte_t pte_mkyoung (pte_t pte) {return pte_set_flags (pte, _PAGE_ACCESSED); } +static inline pmd_t pmd_mkyoung (pmd_t pmd) +{ +return pmd_set_flags (pmd, _PAGE_ACCESSED); +} +static inline pte_t pte_mkwrite (pte_t pte) {return pte_set_flags (pte, _PAGE_RW); } +static inline pmd_t pmd_mkwrite (pmd_t pmd) +{ +return pmd_set_flags (pmd, _PAGE_RW); +} +static inline pte_t pte_mkhuge (pte_t pte) {return pte_set_flags (pte, _PAGE_PSE);
@@ -320,6 +374,11 @@ static inline int pte_same(pte_t a, pte_return a.pte == b.pte; } +static inline int pmd_same (pmd_t a,pmd_t b) +{ +return a.pmd == b.pmd; +} +static inline int pte_present (pte_t a) {return pte_flags (a) & (_PAGE_PRESENT | _PAGE_PROTNONE);
@@ -351,7 +410,7 @@ static inline unsigned long pmd_page_vad* Currently stuck as a macro due to indirect forward reference to * linux/mmzone.h's __section_mem_map_addr() definition: */ -#define pmd_page (pmd) pfn_to_page(pmd_val(pmd) >> PAGE_SHIFT) +#define pmd_page (pmd) pfn_to_page((pmd_val(pmd) & PTE_PFN_MASK) >> PAGE_SHIFT)/* * the pmd page can be thought of an array like this: pmd_t[PTRS_PER_PMD]
@@ -372,6 +431,7 @@ static inline unsigned long pmd_index(un* to linux/mm.h:page_to_nid()) */ #define mk_pte (page, pgprot) pfn_pte(page_to_pfn(page), (pgprot)) +#define mk_pmd (page, pgprot) pfn_pmd(page_to_pfn(page), (pgprot))/* * the pte page can be thought of an array like this: pte_t[PTRS_PER_PTE]
@@ -568,14 +628,21 @@ struct vm_area_struct;extern int ptep_set_access_flags (struct vm_area_struct *vma,unsigned long address,pte_t *ptep,pte_t entry,int dirty); +extern int pmdp_set_access_flags (struct vm_area_struct *vma, +unsigned long address,pmd_t *pmdp, +pmd_t entry,int dirty);#define __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_TEST_AND_CLEAR_YOUNGextern int ptep_test_and_clear_young (struct vm_area_struct *vma,unsigned long addr,pte_t *ptep); +extern int pmdp_test_and_clear_young (struct vm_area_struct *vma, +unsigned long addr,pmd_t *pmdp);#define __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_CLEAR_YOUNG_FLUSHextern int ptep_clear_flush_young (struct vm_area_struct *vma,unsigned long address,pte_t *ptep); +extern int pmdp_clear_flush_young (struct vm_area_struct *vma, +unsigned long address,pmd_t *pmdp);#define __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_GET_AND_CLEAR static inline pte_t ptep_get_and_clear(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
@@ -586,6 +653,14 @@ static inline pte_t ptep_get_and_clear(sreturn pte; } +static inline pmd_t pmdp_get_and_clear (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr, +pmd_t *pmdp) +{ +pmd_t pmd =native_pmdp_get_and_clear (pmdp); +pmd_update (mm, addr, pmdp); +return pmd; +} +#define __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_GET_AND_CLEAR_FULL static inline pte_t ptep_get_and_clear_full(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep,
@@ -612,6 +687,16 @@ static inline void ptep_set_wrprotect(stpte_update (mm, addr, ptep); } +static inline void pmdp_set_wrprotect (struct mm_struct *mm, +unsigned long addr,pmd_t *pmdp) +{ +clear_bit (_PAGE_BIT_RW, (unsigned long *)&pmdp->pmd); +pmd_update (mm, addr, pmd); +} + +extern void pmdp_splitting_flush (struct vm_area_struct *vma, +unsigned long addr,pmd_t *pmdp); +/* * clone_pgd_range(pgd_t *dst, pgd_t *src, int count); *
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64.h +12 -0
@@ -71,6 +71,18 @@ static inline pte_t native_ptep_get_and_return ret;#endif } +static inline pmd_t native_pmdp_get_and_clear (pmd_t *xp) +{ +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP +return native_make_pmd (xchg (&xp->pmd,0 )); +#else +/* native_local_pmdp_get_and_clear, +but duplicated because of cyclic dependency */ +pmd_t ret = *xp; +native_pmd_clear (NULL ,0 , xp); +return ret; +#endif +}static inline void native_set_pmd (pmd_t *pmdp,pmd_t pmd) {
arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c +60 -0
78 lines not on this page · raw message
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 11 of 30] add pmd mangling functions to x86
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h static inline unsigned long pmd_page_vad · line 413
Quoted 6 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h +1
-1@@ -351,7 +410,7 @@ static inline unsigned long pmd_page_vad* Currently stuck as a macro due to indirect forward reference to * linux/mmzone.h's __section_mem_map_addr() definition: */ -#define pmd_page (pmd) pfn_to_page(pmd_val(pmd) >> PAGE_SHIFT) +#define pmd_page (pmd) pfn_to_page((pmd_val(pmd) & PTE_PFN_MASK) >> PAGE_SHIFT)
Is there some new use of the high pmd bits or something? I'm a bit confused why this is getting modified.
-- Dave
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Re: [PATCH 11 of 30] add pmd mangling functions to x86
Quoted 10 lines · Dave Hansen
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h static inline unsigned long pmd_page_vad · line 413
Quoted 6 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h +1
-1@@ -351,7 +410,7 @@ static inline unsigned long pmd_page_vad* Currently stuck as a macro due to indirect forward reference to * linux/mmzone.h's __section_mem_map_addr() definition: */ -#define pmd_page (pmd) pfn_to_page(pmd_val(pmd) >> PAGE_SHIFT) +#define pmd_page (pmd) pfn_to_page((pmd_val(pmd) & PTE_PFN_MASK) >> PAGE_SHIFT)Is there some new use of the high pmd bits or something? I'm a bit confused why this is getting modified.
The NX bit is properly enabled on the huge pmd too.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
PATCH 1/1 pte alloc trans splitting
In reply to Andrea ArcangeliFrom: Andrea Arcangeli <[email protected]>
pte alloc routines must wait for split_huge_page if the pmd is not present and not null (i.e. pmd_trans_splitting). The additional branches are optimized away at compile time by pmd_trans_splitting if the config option is off. However we must pass the vma down in order to know the anon_vma lock to wait for.
---
include/linux/mm.h +8 -5
@@ -948,7 +948,8 @@ static inline int __pmd_alloc(struct mm_int __pmd_alloc (struct mm_struct *mm,pud_t *pud,unsigned long address);#endif -int __pte_alloc (struct mm_struct *mm,pmd_t *pmd,unsigned long address); +int __pte_alloc (struct mm_struct *mm,struct vm_area_struct *vma, +pmd_t *pmd,unsigned long address);int __pte_alloc_kernel (pmd_t *pmd,unsigned long address);/*
@@ -1017,12 +1018,14 @@ static inline void pgtable_page_dtor(strpte_unmap (pte); \ } while (0) -#define pte_alloc_map (mm, pmd, address) \ - ((unlikely(!pmd_present(*(pmd))) && __pte_alloc(mm, pmd, address))? \ - NULL: pte_offset_map(pmd, address)) +#define pte_alloc_map (mm, vma, pmd, address) \ + ((unlikely(!pmd_present(*(pmd))) && __pte_alloc(mm, vma, \ + pmd, address))? \ + NULL: pte_offset_map(pmd, address))#define pte_alloc_map_lock (mm, pmd, address, ptlp) \ - ((unlikely(!pmd_present(*(pmd))) && __pte_alloc(mm, pmd, address))? \ + ((unlikely(!pmd_present(*(pmd))) && __pte_alloc(mm, NULL, \ + pmd, address))? \ NULL: pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, ptlp))#define pte_alloc_kernel (pmd, address) \
mm/memory.c +13 -6
@@ -324,9 +324,11 @@ void free_pgtables(struct mmu_gather *tl } } -int __pte_alloc (struct mm_struct *mm,pmd_t *pmd,unsigned long address) +int __pte_alloc (struct mm_struct *mm,struct vm_area_struct *vma, +pmd_t *pmd,unsigned long address) {pgtable_t new =pte_alloc_one (mm, address); +int wait_split_huge_page;if (!new)return -ENOMEM ;
@@ -346,14 +348,18 @@ int __pte_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm, pmsmp_wmb ();/* Could be smp_wmb__xxx(before|after)_spin_lock */ spin_lock (&mm->page_table_lock); -if (!pmd_present (*pmd)) {/* Has another populated it ? */ + wait_split_huge_page =0 ; +if (likely (pmd_none (*pmd))) {/* Has another populated it ? */ mm->nr_ptes++;pmd_populate (mm, pmd, new); new =NULL ; - } + }else if (unlikely (pmd_trans_splitting (*pmd))) + wait_split_huge_page =1 ;spin_unlock (&mm->page_table_lock);if (new)pte_free (mm, new); +if (wait_split_huge_page) +wait_split_huge_page (vma->anon_vma, pmd);return 0 ; }
@@ -366,10 +372,11 @@ int __pte_alloc_kernel(pmd_t *pmd, unsigsmp_wmb ();/* See comment in __pte_alloc */ spin_lock (&init_mm.page_table_lock); -if (!pmd_present (*pmd)) {/* Has another populated it ? */ +if (likely (pmd_none (*pmd))) {/* Has another populated it ? */ pmd_populate_kernel (&init_mm, pmd, new); new =NULL ; - } + }else +VM_BUG_ON (pmd_trans_splitting (*pmd));spin_unlock (&init_mm.page_table_lock);if (new)pte_free_kernel (&init_mm, new);
@@ -3020,7 +3027,7 @@ int handle_mm_fault(struct mm_struct *mm pmd =pmd_alloc (mm, pud, address);if (!pmd)return VM_FAULT_OOM ; - pte =pte_alloc_map (mm, pmd, address); + pte =pte_alloc_map (mm, vma, pmd, address);if (!pte)return VM_FAULT_OOM ;
mm/mremap.c +4 -3
@@ -48,7 +48,8 @@ static pmd_t *get_old_pmd(struct mm_strureturn pmd; } -static pmd_t *alloc_new_pmd (struct mm_struct *mm,unsigned long addr) +static pmd_t *alloc_new_pmd (struct mm_struct *mm,struct vm_area_struct *vma, +unsigned long addr) {pgd_t *pgd;pud_t *pud;
@@ -63,7 +64,7 @@ static pmd_t *alloc_new_pmd(struct mm_stif (!pmd)return NULL ; -if (!pmd_present (*pmd) &&__pte_alloc (mm, pmd, addr)) +if (!pmd_present (*pmd) &&__pte_alloc (mm, vma, pmd, addr))return NULL ;return pmd;
@@ -148,7 +149,7 @@ unsigned long move_page_tables(struct vm old_pmd =get_old_pmd (vma->vm_mm, old_addr);if (!old_pmd)continue ; - new_pmd =alloc_new_pmd (vma->vm_mm, new_addr); + new_pmd =alloc_new_pmd (vma->vm_mm, vma, new_addr);if (!new_pmd)break ; next = (new_addr +PMD_SIZE ) &PMD_MASK ;
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Jus thinking about yesterdays fix to page migration:
This means that huge pages are unstable right? Kernel code cannot establish a reference to a 2M/4M page and be sure that the page is not broken up due to something in the VM that cannot handle huge pages?
We need special locking for this?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 5 lines · Christoph Lameter
Jus thinking about yesterdays fix to page migration:
This means that huge pages are unstable right? Kernel code cannot establish a reference to a 2M/4M page and be sure that the page is not broken up due to something in the VM that cannot handle huge pages?
Physically speaking DMA-wise they cannot be broken up, only thing that gets broken up is the pmd that instead of mapping the page directly starts to map the pte. Nothing changes on the physical side of hugepages. khugepaged only collapse pages into hugepages if there are no references at all (no gup no nothing) so again no issue DMA-wise.
Quoted 1 line
We need special locking for this?
Only special locking is to take page_table_lock if pmd_trans_huge is set. pmd_trans_huge cannot appear from under us because we either hold the mmap_sem in read mode, or we have the PG_lock, or in gup_fast we have irq disabled so the ipi of collapse_huge_page will wait. It's all handled transparently by the patch, you won't notice you're dealing with hugepage if you're gup user (unless you use gup to migrate pages in which case calling split_huge_page is enough like in patch ;).
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 7 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 5 lines · Christoph Lameter
Jus thinking about yesterdays fix to page migration:
This means that huge pages are unstable right? Kernel code cannot establish a reference to a 2M/4M page and be sure that the page is not broken up due to something in the VM that cannot handle huge pages?
Quoted 5 lines
Physically speaking DMA-wise they cannot be broken up, only thing that gets broken up is the pmd that instead of mapping the page directly starts to map the pte. Nothing changes on the physical side of hugepages. khugepaged only collapse pages into hugepages if there are no references at all (no gup no nothing) so again no issue DMA-wise.
Reclaim cannot kick out page size pieces of the huge page?
Quoted 4 lines
have irq disabled so the ipi of
collapse_huge_pagewill wait. It's all handled transparently by the patch, you won't notice you're dealing with hugepage if you're gup user (unless you use gup to migrate pages in which case callingsplit_huge_pageis enough like in patch ;).
What if I want to use hugepages for some purpose and I dont want to use 512 pointers to keep track of the individual pieces?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 9 lines · Christoph Lameter
Quoted 7 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 5 lines · Christoph Lameter
Jus thinking about yesterdays fix to page migration:
This means that huge pages are unstable right? Kernel code cannot establish a reference to a 2M/4M page and be sure that the page is not broken up due to something in the VM that cannot handle huge pages?
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Physically speaking DMA-wise they cannot be broken up, only thing that gets broken up is the pmd that instead of mapping the page directly starts to map the pte. Nothing changes on the physical side of hugepages. khugepaged only collapse pages into hugepages if there are no references at all (no gup no nothing) so again no issue DMA-wise.
Reclaim cannot kick out page size pieces of the huge page?
Before the VM can kick out any hugepage it has to split it, then each page-sized-piece will be considered individually, so reclaim only kicks out page-sized-pieces of the hugepage.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
have irq disabled so the ipi of
collapse_huge_pagewill wait. It's all handled transparently by the patch, you won't notice you're dealing with hugepage if you're gup user (unless you use gup to migrate pages in which case callingsplit_huge_pageis enough like in patch ;).What if I want to use hugepages for some purpose and I dont want to use 512 pointers to keep track of the individual pieces?
If you use hugepages and there's no VM activity or other activity that triggers split_huge_page, there are no 512 pointers, but just 1 pointer in the pmd to the hugepage, and no other link at all. There is also one preallocated uninitialized all-zero pte queued in the mm in case we have to split the hugepage later but it has no pointers to the hugepage at all (it will have those only if the page is splitted later for some reason, and then the pmd will point the preallocated pte instead of the hugepage directly).
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 8 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
hugepages. khugepaged only collapse pages into hugepages if there are no references at all (no gup no nothing) so again no issue DMA-wise.
Reclaim cannot kick out page size pieces of the huge page?
Before the VM can kick out any hugepage it has to split it, then each page-sized-piece will be considered individually, so reclaim only kicks out page-sized-pieces of the hugepage.
So yes.... Sigh.
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
have irq disabled so the ipi of
collapse_huge_pagewill wait. It's all handled transparently by the patch, you won't notice you're dealing with hugepage if you're gup user (unless you use gup to migrate pages in which case callingsplit_huge_pageis enough like in patch ;).What if I want to use hugepages for some purpose and I dont want to use 512 pointers to keep track of the individual pieces?
If you use hugepages and there's no VM activity or other activity that triggers
split_huge_page, there are no 512 pointers, but just 1 pointer in the pmd to the hugepage, and no other link at all. There is
There is always VM activity, so we need 512 pointers sigh.
So its not possible to use these "huge" pages in a useful way inside of the kernel. They are volatile and temporary.
In short they cannot be treated as 2M entities unless we add some logic to prevent splitting.
Frankly this seems to be adding splitting that cannot be used if one really wants to use large pages for something.
I still think we should get transparent huge page support straight up first without complicated fallback schemes that makes huge pages difficult to use.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 1 line · Christoph Lameter
There is always VM activity, so we need 512 pointers sigh.
well you said some week ago that actual systems never swap and swap is useless... if they don't swap there will be just 1 pointer in the pmd. The mprotect/mremap we want to learn using pmd_trans_huge natively without split but again, this is incremental work.
Quoted 2 lines
So its not possible to use these "huge" pages in a useful way inside of the kernel. They are volatile and temporary.
They are so useless that firefox never splits them, this is my laptop. khugepaged running so if there's swapout, after swapin they will be collapsed back into hugepages.
AnonPages: 357148 kB AnonHugePages: 53248 kB
Quoted 2 lines
In short they cannot be treated as 2M entities unless we add some logic to prevent splitting.
They can on the physical side, splitting only involves the virtual side, this is why O_DIRECT DMA through gup already works on hugepages without splitting them.
Quoted 6 lines
Frankly this seems to be adding splitting that cannot be used if one really wants to use large pages for something.
I still think we should get transparent huge page support straight up first without complicated fallback schemes that makes huge pages difficult to use.
Just send me patches to remove all callers of split_huge_page, then split_huge_page can go away too. But saying that hugepages aren't useful already is absurd, kvm with "madvise" default of sysfs already gets the full benefit, nothing more can be achieved by kvm in performance and functionality than what my patch delivers already (ok swapping will be a little more efficient if done through 2M I/O but swap performance isn't so critical). Our objective is to over time eliminate the need of split_huge_page. khugepaged will remain required forever, unless the whole kernel ram will become relocatable and defrag not just an heuristic but a guarantee (it is needed after one VM exits and release several gigs of hugepages, so the other VM get the speedup).
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 7 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 1 line · Christoph Lameter
There is always VM activity, so we need 512 pointers sigh.
well you said some week ago that actual systems never swap and swap is useless... if they don't swap there will be just 1 pointer in the pmd. The mprotect/mremap we want to learn using
pmd_trans_hugenatively without split but again, this is incremental work.
I have to disable swap to be able to make use of these huge pages?
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
So its not possible to use these "huge" pages in a useful way inside of the kernel. They are volatile and temporary.
They are so useless that firefox never splits them, this is my laptop. khugepaged running so if there's swapout, after swapin they will be collapsed back into hugepages.
Just because your configuration did not split does not mean that there is a guarantee of them not splitting. You need to guarantee that the VM does not split them in order to be able to safely refer to them from code (like I/O paths).
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 2 lines
In short they cannot be treated as 2M entities unless we add some logic to prevent splitting.
They can on the physical side, splitting only involves the virtual side, this is why
O_DIRECTDMA through gup already works on hugepages without splitting them.
Earlier you stated that reclaim can remove 4k pieces of huge pages after a split. How does gup keep the huge pages stable while doing I/O? Does gup submit 512 pointers to 4k chunks or 1 pointer to a 2M chunk?
Quoted 4 lines
Just send me patches to remove all callers of
split_huge_page, thensplit_huge_pagecan go away too. But saying that hugepages aren't useful already is absurd, kvm with "madvise" default of sysfs already gets the full benefit, nothing more can be achieved by kvm in
This implementation seems to only address the TLB pressure issue but not the scaling issue that arises because we have to handle data in 4k chunks (512 4k pointers instead of one 2M pointer). Scaling is not addressed because complex fallback logic sabotages a basic benefit of huge pages.
Quoted 4 lines
performance and functionality than what my patch delivers already (ok swapping will be a little more efficient if done through 2M I/O but swap performance isn't so critical). Our objective is to over time eliminate the need of
split_huge_page. khugepaged will remain required
Ok then establish some way to make these huge pages stable.
Quoted 4 lines
forever, unless the whole kernel ram will become relocatable and defrag not just an heuristic but a guarantee (it is needed after one VM exits and release several gigs of hugepages, so the other VM get the speedup).
That all depends on what you mean by guarantee I guess.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 1 line · Christoph Lameter
I have to disable swap to be able to make use of these huge pages?
No.
Quoted 4 lines
Just because your configuration did not split does not mean that there is a guarantee of them not splitting. You need to guarantee that the VM does not split them in order to be able to safely refer to them from code (like I/O paths).
No. O_DIRECT already works on those pages without splitting them, there is no need to split them, just run 512 gups like you would be doing if those weren't hugepages.
If your I/O can be interrupted then just use mmu notifier, call gup_fast, and be notified if anything runs that split the page.
Splitting the page doesn't mean relocating it, DMA won't be able to notice. So if you use mmu notifier just 1 gup + put_page will be enough exactly because with mmu notifier you won't need refcounting on tail pages and head pages at all!
If you don't have longstanding mapping and a way to synchronously interrupt the visibility of hugepages from your device, then likely you work with small dma sizes like storage and networking does, and gup each 4k will be fine.
Quoted 3 lines
Earlier you stated that reclaim can remove 4k pieces of huge pages after a split. How does gup keep the huge pages stable while doing I/O? Does gup submit 512 pointers to 4k chunks or 1 pointer to a 2M chunk?
gup works like now, you just write code that works today on a fragmented hugepage, and it'll still work. So you need to run 512 gup_fast to be sure all 4k fragments are stable. But if you can use mmu notifier just one gup_fast(&head_page), put_page(head_page) will be enough after you're registered.
I'm unsure exactly what you need to do that won't be feasible with mmu notifier and 1 gup or 512 gup.
Quoted 5 lines
This implementation seems to only address the TLB pressure issue but not the scaling issue that arises because we have to handle data in 4k chunks (512 4k pointers instead of one 2M pointer). Scaling is not addressed because complex fallback logic sabotages a basic benefit of huge pages.
Scaling is addressed for everything, including collapsing the hugepage back after swapin if they're fragmented because of that. Furthermore we want to remove split_huge_page from as many paths as possible but Rome wasn't built in a day. We need to stabilize and stress this code now, then we include it, and extend it to tmpfs and pagecache.
Note a malloc(3G)+memset(3G) takes >5sec with lockdep without transparent hugepage, or <2sec after "echo always >enabled", TLB pressure is irrelevant in that workload that spends all time allocating pages and clearing them through kernel direct mapping. Your idea that this is only taking care of TLB pressure is totally wrong and I posted benchmarks already as proof (which become extreme the moment you enable lockdep and all the little locks becomes more costly, so avoiding 512 page faults and doing a single call to alloc_pages(order=9) speedup the workload more than 100%).
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
performance and functionality than what my patch delivers already (ok swapping will be a little more efficient if done through 2M I/O but swap performance isn't so critical). Our objective is to over time eliminate the need of
split_huge_page. khugepaged will remain requiredOk then establish some way to make these huge pages stable.
Again: register into mmu notifer, call gup_fast; put_page, and you're done. 1 op, and just 3 cachelines for pgd,pud and pmd to get to the page.
Quoted 1 line
That all depends on what you mean by guarantee I guess.
mmu notifier is a must if the mapping is longstanding or you'll lock the ram. It's also a lot more efficient than doing 512 gup_fast which would achieve the same effect but it's evil against the VM (lock the user virtual memory in ram) and requires 512 gup instead of just 1.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 3 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
No.
O_DIRECTalready works on those pages without splitting them, there is no need to split them, just run 512 gups like you would be doing if those weren't hugepages.
That show the scaling issue is not solved.
Quoted 2 lines
If your I/O can be interrupted then just use mmu notifier, call
gup_fast, and be notified if anything runs that split the page.
"Just use mmu notifier"? Its quite a cost to register/unregister the memory range. Again unnecessary complexity here.
Quoted 4 lines
Splitting the page doesn't mean relocating it, DMA won't be able to notice. So if you use mmu notifier just 1 gup +
put_pagewill be enough exactly because with mmu notifier you won't need refcounting on tail pages and head pages at all!
Page migration can relocate 4k pieces it seems.
Quoted 4 lines
If you don't have longstanding mapping and a way to synchronously interrupt the visibility of hugepages from your device, then likely you work with small dma sizes like storage and networking does, and gup each 4k will be fine.
"synchronously interrupt the visibility of hugepages"???? What does that mean?
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Earlier you stated that reclaim can remove 4k pieces of huge pages after a split. How does gup keep the huge pages stable while doing I/O? Does gup submit 512 pointers to 4k chunks or 1 pointer to a 2M chunk?
gup works like now, you just write code that works today on a fragmented hugepage, and it'll still work. So you need to run 512
gup_fastto be sure all 4k fragments are stable. But if you can use mmu notifier just onegup_fast(&head_page),put_page(head_page)will be enough after you're registered.
Just dont want that... Would like to have one 2M page not 512 4k pages.
Quoted 9 lines
Note a malloc(3G)+memset(3G) takes >5sec with lockdep without transparent hugepage, or <2sec after "echo always >enabled", TLB pressure is irrelevant in that workload that spends all time allocating pages and clearing them through kernel direct mapping. Your idea that this is only taking care of TLB pressure is totally wrong and I posted benchmarks already as proof (which become extreme the moment you enable lockdep and all the little locks becomes more costly, so avoiding 512 page faults and doing a single call to
alloc_pages(order=9)speedup the workload more than 100%).
So the allocation works in 2M chunks. Okay that scales at that point but code cannot rely on these 2M chunks to continue to exist without ancilliary expensive measures (mmu notifier)
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
That all depends on what you mean by guarantee I guess.
mmu notifier is a must if the mapping is longstanding or you'll lock the ram. It's also a lot more efficient than doing 512
gup_fastwhich would achieve the same effect but it's evil against the VM (lock the user virtual memory in ram) and requires 512 gup instead of just 1.
mmu notifier is expensive. The earlier implementations were able to get a stable huge page reference by simply doing a get_page().
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 3 lines · Christoph Lameter
So the allocation works in 2M chunks. Okay that scales at that point but code cannot rely on these 2M chunks to continue to exist without ancilliary expensive measures (mmu notifier)
mmu notifier "ancilliary expensive measures"? Ask robin with xpmem, check gru and see how slower kvm runs thanks to mmu notifier..
All you're asking is in the future to also add a 2M-wide pin in gup, that is not what the current API provides, and so it requires a new gup_huge_fast API, not the current one, and it is feasible! Just not done in this implementation as it'd make things more complex.
Just stop this red herring of yours that a replacement of the pmd_trans_huge with a pte has anything to do with the physical side of the hugepage. Splitting the page doesn't alter the physical side at all, it's a _virtual_ split, and your remaining argument is how to take a global pin on only the head page and having it distributed to all tail pages when the virtual split happens. This is utterly unnecessary overhead to all subsystems using mmu notifier, but it might speedup O_DIRECT a little bit on hugepages, so it may happen later.
Quoted 2 lines
mmu notifier is expensive. The earlier implementations were able to get a stable huge page reference by simply doing a
get_page().
That only works on hugetlbfs and it's not a property of gup_fast. It breaks if userland maps a different mapping under you or if libhugetlbfs is unloaded. We can extend the refcounting logic to achieve the same "1 op pins 2M" feature but first of all we need a new API gup_huge_fast, current api doesn't allow it. I think it's simply wise to wait stabilizing this, before adding a new feature but if you want me to do it now that's ok with me.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 6 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 3 lines
So the allocation works in 2M chunks. Okay that scales at that point but code cannot rely on these 2M chunks to continue to exist without ancilliary expensive measures (mmu notifier)
mmu notifier "ancilliary expensive measures"? Ask robin with xpmem, check gru and see how slower kvm runs thanks to mmu notifier..
This is overhead that will be there everytime you get a reference on a 2M page. Its not a one time thing like with xpmem and kvm.
Quoted 4 lines
All you're asking is in the future to also add a 2M-wide pin in gup, that is not what the current API provides, and so it requires a new
gup_huge_fastAPI, not the current one, and it is feasible! Just not done in this implementation as it'd make things more complex.
I have never asked for anything in gup. gup does not break up a huge page.
Quoted 4 lines
Just stop this red herring of yours that a replacement of the
pmd_trans_hugewith a pte has anything to do with the physical side of the hugepage. Splitting the page doesn't alter the physical side at all, it's a _virtual_ split, and your remaining argument is how to
Splitting a page allows reclaim / page migration to occur on 4k components of the huge page. Thus you are not guaranteed the integrity of your 2M page.
Quoted 5 lines
take a global pin on only the head page and having it distributed to all tail pages when the virtual split happens. This is utterly unnecessary overhead to all subsystems using mmu notifier, but it might speedup
O_DIRECTa little bit on hugepages, so it may happen later.
Simply taking a refcount on the head page of a compound page should pin it for good until the refcount is released. These are established conventions and doing so has minimal overhead.
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 2 lines
mmu notifier is expensive. The earlier implementations were able to get a stable huge page reference by simply doing a
get_page().That only works on hugetlbfs and it's not a property of
gup_fast. It breaks if userland maps a different mapping under you or if libhugetlbfs is unloaded. We can extend the refcounting logic to achieve the same "1 op pins 2M" feature but first of all we need a new APIgup_huge_fast, current api doesn't allow it. I think it's simply wise to wait stabilizing this, before adding a new feature but if you want me to do it now that's ok with me.
Maybe you can explain why gup is so important to you? Its one example of establishing references to pages. Establishing a page reference is a basic feature of the Linux Operating system and doing so pins that page in memory for until the code is done and releases the refcount.
Why not keep the same semantics for huge pages instead of all the complicated stuff here? No need for a compound lock etc etc.
If you want to break up a huge page then make sure that all refcounts on the head page are accounted for and then convert it to 4k chunks. Basically a form of page migration and it does not require any new VM semantics or locks.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 8 lines · Christoph Lameter
Quoted 4 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
No.
O_DIRECTalready works on those pages without splitting them, there is no need to split them, just run 512 gups like you would be doing if those weren't hugepages.That show the scaling issue is not solved.
Well, gup works for a range of addresses, so all you need it one, and I'm sure it can be optimized to take advantage of transparent huge pages.
Signature · 7 lines
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 8 lines · Christoph Lameter
So its not possible to use these "huge" pages in a useful way inside of the kernel. They are volatile and temporary.
In short they cannot be treated as 2M entities unless we add some logic to prevent splitting.
Frankly this seems to be adding splitting that cannot be used if one really wants to use large pages for something.
What exactly do you need the stable huge pages for?
Do you have anything specific in mind that we should take into account?
Want to send in an incremental patch that can temporarily block the pageout code from splitting up a huge page, so your direct users of huge pages can rely on them sticking around until the transaction is done?
Quoted 3 lines
I still think we should get transparent huge page support straight up first without complicated fallback schemes that makes huge pages difficult to use.
Without swapping, they will become difficult to use for system administrators, at least in the workloads we care about.
I understand that your workloads may be different.
Please tell us what you need, instead of focussing on what you don't want, and we may be able to keep the code in such a shape that you can easily add your functionality.
Signature · 7 lines
All rights reversed. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 13 lines · Rik van Riel
Quoted 8 lines · Christoph Lameter
So its not possible to use these "huge" pages in a useful way inside of the kernel. They are volatile and temporary.
In short they cannot be treated as 2M entities unless we add some logic to prevent splitting.
Frankly this seems to be adding splitting that cannot be used if one really wants to use large pages for something.
What exactly do you need the stable huge pages for?
Quoted 8 lines
Do you have anything specific in mind that we should take into account?
Want to send in an incremental patch that can temporarily block the pageout code from splitting up a huge page, so your direct users of huge pages can rely on them sticking around until the transaction is done?
Shouldn't mlock() do the trick?
--
Gleb.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 17 lines · Gleb Natapov
Quoted 16 lines · Rik van Riel
Quoted 8 lines · Christoph Lameter
So its not possible to use these "huge" pages in a useful way inside of the kernel. They are volatile and temporary.
In short they cannot be treated as 2M entities unless we add some logic to prevent splitting.
Frankly this seems to be adding splitting that cannot be used if one really wants to use large pages for something.
What exactly do you need the stable huge pages for?
Do you have anything specific in mind that we should take into account?
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Want to send in an incremental patch that can temporarily block the pageout code from splitting up a huge page, so your direct users of huge pages can rely on them sticking around until the transaction is done?
Shouldn't
mlock()do the trick?
gup already does the trick of preventing swapping of only the pieces that are pinned. But it's ok only for temporary direct access like DMA, ideally if the access to the page can be stopped synchronously and the mapping is longstanding (not something dma can do, so O_DIRECT can't do) mmu notifier should be used to allow paging of the page and teardown the secondary mmu mapping.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 6 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
gup already does the trick of preventing swapping of only the pieces that are pinned. But it's ok only for temporary direct access like DMA, ideally if the access to the page can be stopped synchronously and the mapping is longstanding (not something dma can do, so
O_DIRECTcan't do) mmu notifier should be used to allow paging of the page and teardown the secondary mmu mapping.
How does it do that? Take a reference on each of the 512 pieces? Or does it take one reference?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 2 lines · Christoph Lameter
How does it do that? Take a reference on each of the 512 pieces? Or does it take one reference?
_zero_ reference! gup_fast is there only to pagein, in fact we need to add one new type of gup_fast that won't take a reference at all and only ensures the pmd_trans_huge pmd or the regular pte is mapped before returning (or it will page it in before returning if it wasn't), with mmu notifier it is always wasteful to take page pins.
So for now you will run put_page immediately after gup_fast returns. The whole point of mmu notifier is not to require any refcount on the pages (or if there are, they are forced to be released by the mmu notifier methods before they return, otherwise they defeat the whole purpose of registering into mmu notifier). So the best is not to take refcounts at all.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 1 line · Rik van Riel
What exactly do you need the stable huge pages for?
Reduce VM overhead that arises because we have to handle memory in 4k chunks. I.e. we have to submit 512 descriptors for 4k page sized chunks to do I/O. get_user_pages has to pin 512 pages to get a safe reference. Reclaim has to scan 4k chunks of memory. As the amount of memory increases so does the number of metadatachunks that have to be handled by the VM and the I/O subsystem.
Quoted 4 lines
Want to send in an incremental patch that can temporarily block the pageout code from splitting up a huge page, so your direct users of huge pages can rely on them sticking around until the transaction is done?
Do we need the splitting? It seems that Andrea's firefox never needs to split a huge page anyways.... ;-)
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I still think we should get transparent huge page support straight up first without complicated fallback schemes that makes huge pages difficult to use.
Without swapping, they will become difficult to use for system administrators, at least in the workloads we care about.
Huge pages are already in use through hugetlbs for such workloads. That works without swap. So why is this suddenly such a must have requirement?
Why not swap 2M huge pages as a whole?
Quoted 1 line
I understand that your workloads may be different.
What in your workload forces hugetlb swap use? Just leaving a certain percentage of memory for 4k pages addresses the issue right now.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 2 lines · Christoph Lameter
Huge pages are already in use through hugetlbs for such workloads. That works without swap. So why is this suddenly such a must have requirement?
hugetlbfs is unusable when you're not doing a static alloc for 1 DBMS in 1 machine with alloc size set in a config file that will then match grub command line.
Quoted 1 line
Why not swap 2M huge pages as a whole?
That is nice thing to speedup swap bandwidth and reduce fragmentation, just I couldn't make so many changes in one go. Later we can make this change and remove a few split_huge_page from the rmap paths.
Quoted 2 lines
What in your workload forces hugetlb swap use? Just leaving a certain percentage of memory for 4k pages addresses the issue right now.
hypervisor must be able to swap, furthermore when a VM exists we want to be able to use that ram as pagecache (not to remain reserved in some hugetlbfs). And we must be able to fallback to 4k allocations always without userland being able to notice when unable to defrag, all things hugetlbfs can't do. All designs that can't 100% fallback to 4k allocations are useless in my view as far as you want to keep the word "transparent" in the description of the patch...
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 7 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 2 lines · Christoph Lameter
Huge pages are already in use through hugetlbs for such workloads. That works without swap. So why is this suddenly such a must have requirement?
hugetlbfs is unusable when you're not doing a static alloc for 1 DBMS in 1 machine with alloc size set in a config file that will then match grub command line.
AFAIK that's not true for 2MB pages after all the enhancements Andy/Mel/et.al. did to the defragmentation heuristics, assuming you have enough memory (or define movable zones)
hugetlbfs also does the transparent fallback. It's not pretty, but it seems to work for a lot of people.
-Andi
Signature · 7 lines
[email protected] -- Speaking for myself only. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 7 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 2 lines · Christoph Lameter
Huge pages are already in use through hugetlbs for such workloads. That works without swap. So why is this suddenly such a must have requirement?
hugetlbfs is unusable when you're not doing a static alloc for 1 DBMS in 1 machine with alloc size set in a config file that will then match grub command line.
Huge pages can be allocated / freed while the system is running. This has been true for a long time.
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Why not swap 2M huge pages as a whole?
That is nice thing to speedup swap bandwidth and reduce fragmentation, just I couldn't make so many changes in one go. Later we can make this change and remove a few
split_huge_pagefrom the rmap paths.
You would have to mmu register these 2M pages in order to swap them to disk with an operation that writes 2M in one go?
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 2 lines
What in your workload forces hugetlb swap use? Just leaving a certain percentage of memory for 4k pages addresses the issue right now.
hypervisor must be able to swap, furthermore when a VM exists we want to be able to use that ram as pagecache (not to remain reserved in some hugetlbfs). And we must be able to fallback to 4k allocations always without userland being able to notice when unable to defrag, all things hugetlbfs can't do. All designs that can't 100% fallback to 4k allocations are useless in my view as far as you want to keep the word "transparent" in the description of the patch...
If the page cache can use huge pages then you can use that ram as page cache.
Transparency is only necessary at the system API layer where user code interacts with the kernel services. What the kernel internally does can be different. 100% fallback within the kernel is not needed. 100% OS interface compatibility is.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 8 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 2 lines · Christoph Lameter
Huge pages are already in use through hugetlbs for such workloads. That works without swap. So why is this suddenly such a must have requirement?
hugetlbfs is unusable when you're not doing a static alloc for 1 DBMS in 1 machine with alloc size set in a config file that will then match grub command line.
That may have been the case once upon a time but is far from accurate now. I routinely run benchmarks against a database using huge pages that isn't even hugepage-aware without going through insane steps. The huge pages are often allocated when the system has already been running several days (and in one case a few weeks) and I didn't have to be overly specific on how many huge pages I needed either as additional ones were allocated as required.
hugetlbfs may be not be ideal, but it's not quite as catastrophic as commonly believed either.
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 1 line
Why not swap 2M huge pages as a whole?
That is nice thing to speedup swap bandwidth and reduce fragmentation, just I couldn't make so many changes in one go. Later we can make this change and remove a few
split_huge_pagefrom the rmap paths.Quoted 2 lines
What in your workload forces hugetlb swap use? Just leaving a certain percentage of memory for 4k pages addresses the issue right now.
hypervisor must be able to swap, furthermore when a VM exists we want to be able to use that ram as pagecache (not to remain reserved in some hugetlbfs). And we must be able to fallback to 4k allocations always without userland being able to notice when unable to defrag, all things hugetlbfs can't do. All designs that can't 100% fallback to 4k allocations are useless in my view as far as you want to keep the word "transparent" in the description of the patch...
Signature · 9 lines
Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 2 lines
hugetlbfs may be not be ideal, but it's not quite as catastrophic as commonly believed either.
I want 100% of userbase to take advantage of it, hugetlbfs isn't even mounted by default... and there is no way to use libhugetlbfs by default.
I think hugetlbfs is fine for a niche of users (for those power users kernel hackers and huge DBMS it may also be better than transparent hugepage and they should keep using it!!! thanks to being able to reserve pages at boot), but for the 99% of userbase it's exactly as catastrophic as commonly believed. Otherwise I am 100% sure that I wouldn't be the first one on linux to decrease the tlb misses with 2M pages while watching videos on youtube (>60M on hugepages will happen with atom netbook). And that's nothing compared to many other workloads. Yes not so important for desktop but on server especially with EPT/NPT it's a must and hugetlbfs is as catastrophic as on "default desktop" in the virtualization cloud.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 7 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
Quoted 2 lines
hugetlbfs may be not be ideal, but it's not quite as catastrophic as commonly believed either.
I want 100% of userbase to take advantage of it, hugetlbfs isn't even mounted by default... and there is no way to use libhugetlbfs by default.
Quoted 6 lines
I think hugetlbfs is fine for a niche of users (for those power users kernel hackers and huge DBMS it may also be better than transparent hugepage and they should keep using it!!! thanks to being able to reserve pages at boot), but for the 99% of userbase it's exactly as catastrophic as commonly believed. Otherwise I am 100% sure that I wouldn't be the first one on linux to decrease the tlb misses with 2M
You're not, I beat you to it a long time ago. In fact, I just watched a dumb hit smack into a treadmill (feeling badminded) with the browser using huge pages in the background just to confirm I wasn't imagining it. Launched with
hugectl --shm --heap epiphany-browser
HugePages_Total: 5 HugePages_Free: 1 HugePages_Rsvd: 1 HugePages_Surp: 5 Hugepagesize: 4096 kB
(Surp implies the huge pages were allocated on demand, not statically)
17:22:01 up 7 days, 1:05, 24 users, load average: 0.62, 0.30, 0.13
Yes, this is not transparent and it's unlikely that a normal user would go to the hassle although conceivably a distro could set a launcher to automtaically try huge pages where available.
I'm just saying that hugetlbfs and the existing utilities are not so bad as to be slammed. Just because it's possible to do something like this does not detract from transparent support in any way.
Quoted 6 lines
pages while watching videos on youtube (>60M on hugepages will happen with atom netbook). And that's nothing compared to many other workloads. Yes not so important for desktop but on server especially with EPT/NPT it's a must and hugetlbfs is as catastrophic as on "default desktop" in the virtualization cloud.
In virtualisation in particular, the lack of swapping makes hugetlbfs a no-go in it's current form. No doubt about it and the transparent support will certainly shine with respect to KVM.
On the flip-side, architecture limitations likely make transparent support a no-go on IA-64 and very likely PPC64 so it doesn't solve everything either.
The existing stuff will continue to exist alongside transparent support because they are ideal in different situations.
FWIW, I'm still reading through the patches and have not spotted anything new that is problematic but I'm only half-way through. By and large, I'm pro-the-patches but am somewhat compelled to defend hugetlbfs :)
Signature · 9 lines
Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 4 lines · Mel Gorman
You're not, I beat you to it a long time ago. In fact, I just watched a dumb hit smack into a treadmill (feeling badminded) with the browser using huge pages in the background just to confirm I wasn't imagining it. Launched with
Quoted 8 lines
hugectl --shm --heap epiphany-browser
HugePages_Total: 5 HugePages_Free: 1 HugePages_Rsvd: 1 HugePages_Surp: 5 Hugepagesize: 4096 kB(Surp implies the huge pages were allocated on demand, not statically)
eheh ;)
Quoted 3 lines
Yes, this is not transparent and it's unlikely that a normal user would go to the hassle although conceivably a distro could set a launcher to automtaically try huge pages where available.
It'll never happen, I think hugetlbfs can't even be mounted by default on all distro... or it's not writable, otherwise it's a mlock DoS...
Quoted 3 lines
I'm just saying that hugetlbfs and the existing utilities are not so bad as to be slammed. Just because it's possible to do something like this does not detract from transparent support in any way.
Agreed, power users can already take advantage from hugepages, I don't object that, problem is most people can't and we want to take advantage of them not just in firefox but whenever possible. Another app using hugepages is knotify4 for example.
Quoted 3 lines
In virtualisation in particular, the lack of swapping makes hugetlbfs a no-go in it's current form. No doubt about it and the transparent support will certainly shine with respect to KVM.
Exactly.
Quoted 3 lines
On the flip-side, architecture limitations likely make transparent support a no-go on IA-64 and very likely PPC64 so it doesn't solve everything either.
Exactly! This is how we discovered that hugetlbfs will stay around maybe forever, regardless how transparent hugepage will expand over the tmpfs/pagecache layer.
Quoted 2 lines
The existing stuff will continue to exist alongside transparent support because they are ideal in different situations.
Agreed.
Quoted 3 lines
FWIW, I'm still reading through the patches and have not spotted anything new that is problematic but I'm only half-way through. By and large, I'm pro-the-patches but am somewhat compelled to defend hugetlbfs :)
NOTE: I very much defend hugetlbfs too! But not for using it with firefox on desktop nor on virtualization cloud. For DBMS hugetlbfs may remain superior solution than transparent hugepage because of the finegrined reservation capabilities. We're in full agreement ;).
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 6 lines · Christoph Lameter
Quoted 4 lines · Rik van Riel
Quoted 3 lines
I still think we should get transparent huge page support straight up first without complicated fallback schemes that makes huge pages difficult to use.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Without swapping, they will become difficult to use for system administrators, at least in the workloads we care about.
Huge pages are already in use through hugetlbs for such workloads. That works without swap. So why is this suddenly such a must have requirement?
Why not swap 2M huge pages as a whole?
A few reasons:
1) Fragmentation of swap space (or the need for a separate swap area for 2MB pages)
2) There is no code to allow us to swap out 2MB pages
3) Internal fragmentation. While 4kB pages are smaller than the objects allocated by many programs, it is likely that most 2MB pages contain both frequently used and rarely used malloced objects. Swapping out just the rarely used 4kB pages from a number of 2MB pages allows us to keep all of the frequently used data in memory.
Swapping out 2MB pages, on the other hand, makes it harder to keep the working set in memory. TLB misses are much cheaper than major page faults.
Signature · 7 lines
All rights reversed. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 9 lines · Rik van Riel
Quoted 4 lines
Huge pages are already in use through hugetlbs for such workloads. That works without swap. So why is this suddenly such a must have requirement?
Why not swap 2M huge pages as a whole?
A few reasons:
1) Fragmentation of swap space (or the need for a separate swap area for 2MB pages)
Swap is already statically allocated. Would not be too difficult to add a 2M area.
Quoted 1 line
2) There is no code to allow us to swap out 2MB pages
If the page descriptors stay the same for huge pages (one page struct describes one 2MB page without any of the weird stuff added in this set) then its simple to do with minor modifications to the existing code.
Quoted 6 lines
3) Internal fragmentation. While 4kB pages are smaller than the objects allocated by many programs, it is likely that most 2MB pages contain both frequently used and rarely used malloced objects. Swapping out just the rarely used 4kB pages from a number of 2MB pages allows us to keep all of the frequently used data in memory.
But that makes the huge page vanish. So no benefit at all from the huge page logic. Just overhead.
Quoted 3 lines
Swapping out 2MB pages, on the other hand, makes it harder to keep the working set in memory. TLB misses are much cheaper than major page faults.
True. Thats why one should not swap if one wants decent performance.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>
Quoted 4 lines · Andrea Arcangeli
- I need to integrate Mel's memory compation code to be used by khugepaged and by the page faults if "defrag" sysfs file setting requires it. His results (especially with the bug fixes that decreased reclaim a lot) looks promising.
As a heads-up on this. I have a V2 ready for testing but no test machines available to start any of the tests until the weekend at the earliest. There are no major changes though. Some cleanup, sysfs prototype and the like. The basic mechanics are the same.
Quoted 4 lines
- likely we'll need a slab front allocator too allocating in 2m chunks, but this should be re-evaluated after merging Mel's work, maybe he already did that.
He didn't but it occurs to me that it could be tested with SLUB by mucking around with the min_order parameters.
Quoted 56 lines
- khugepaged isn't yet capable of merging readonly shared anon pages, that isn't needed by KVM (KVM uses
MADV_DONTFORK) but it might want to learn it for other apps- khugepaged should also learn to skip the copy and collapse the hugepage in-place, if possible (to undo the effect of surpious
split_huge_page)I'm leaving this under a continous stress with
scan_sleep_millisecsanddefrag_sleep_millisecsset to 0 and a 5G swap storm + ~4G in ram. The swap storm before settling inpause()will call madvise to split all hugepages in ram and then it will run a further memset again to swapin everything a second time. Eventually it will settle and khugepaged will remerge as many hugepages as they're fully mapped in userland (mapped as swapcache is ok, but khugepaged will not trigger swapin I/O or swapcache minor fault) if there are enough not fragmented hugepages available.This is shortly after start.
procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu----
r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa0 5 3938052 67688 208 3684 1219 2779 1239 2779 396 1061 1 5 75 20 2 5 3937092 61612 208 3712 25120 24112 25120 24112 7420 5396 0 8 44 48 0 5 3932116 55536 208 3780 26444 21468 26444 21468 7532 5399 0 8 52 40 0 5 3927264 46724 208 3296 28208 22528 28328 22528 7871 5722 0 7 52 41 AnonPages: 1751352 kB AnonHugePages: 2021376 kB procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu---- r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa 0 5 3935604 58092 208 3864 1233 2787 1253 2787 400 1061 1 5 74 20 0 5 3933924 54248 208 3508 23748 23548 23904 23548 7112 4829 0 6 49 45 1 4 3937708 60696 208 3704 24680 28680 24760 28680 7034 5112 0 8 50 42 1 4 3934508 59084 208 3304 24096 21020 24156 21020 6832 5015 0 7 48 46 AnonPages: 1746296 kB AnonHugePages: 2023424 kBthis is after it settled and it's waiting in
pause(). khugepaged when it's not copying with defrag_sleep/scan_sleep both = 0, just trigers a superoverschedule, but as you can see it's extremely low overhead, only taking 8% of 4 cores or 32% of 1 core. Likely most of the cpu is taking byschedule(). So you can imagine how low overhead it is when sleep is set to a "production" level and not stress test level. Default sleep is 10seconds and not 2usec...1 0 5680228 106028 396 5060 0 0 0 0 534 341005 0 8 92 0 1 0 5680228 106028 396 5060 0 0 0 0 517 349159 0 9 91 0 1 0 5680228 106028 396 5060 0 0 0 0 518 346356 0 6 94 0 0 0 5680228 106028 396 5060 0 0 0 0 511 348478 0 8 92 0 AnonPages: 392396 kB AnonHugePages: 3371008 kBSo it looks good so far.
I think it's probably time to port the patchset to mmotd. Further review welcome!
Andrea
Signature · 9 lines
Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>