It is better to use huge_page_size() for hugepage(HugeTLB) instead of
PAGE_SIZE for stride, which has been done in flush_pmd/pud_tlb_range(),
it could reduce the loop in __flush_tlb_range().
Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h | 21 +++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
index 412a3b9a3c25..25e35e6f8093 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
@@ -360,16 +360,17 @@ static inline void __flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
dsb(ish);
}
-static inline void flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
- unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
-{
- /*
- * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
- * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
- * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
- */
- __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, PAGE_SIZE, false, 0);
-}
+/*
+ * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
+ * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
+ * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
+ */
+#define flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end) \
+ __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, \
+ ((vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGETLB) \
+ ? huge_page_size(hstate_vma(vma)) \
+ : PAGE_SIZE, false, 0)
+
static inline void flush_tlb_kernel_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
{
--
2.41.0
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 4:14 PM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> It is better to use huge_page_size() for hugepage(HugeTLB) instead of
> PAGE_SIZE for stride, which has been done in flush_pmd/pud_tlb_range(),
> it could reduce the loop in __flush_tlb_range().
>
> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h | 21 +++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> index 412a3b9a3c25..25e35e6f8093 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> @@ -360,16 +360,17 @@ static inline void __flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> dsb(ish);
> }
>
> -static inline void flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> - unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> -{
> - /*
> - * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
> - * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
> - * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
> - */
> - __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, PAGE_SIZE, false, 0);
> -}
> +/*
> + * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
> + * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
> + * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
> + */
> +#define flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end) \
> + __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, \
> + ((vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGETLB) \
> + ? huge_page_size(hstate_vma(vma)) \
> + : PAGE_SIZE, false, 0)
> +
seems like a good idea.
I wonder if a better implementation will be MMU_GATHER_PAGE_SIZE, in this case,
we are going to support stride for other large folios as well, such as thp.
>
> static inline void flush_tlb_kernel_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> {
> --
> 2.41.0
>
Thanks
Barry
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 4:33 PM Barry Song <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 4:14 PM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > It is better to use huge_page_size() for hugepage(HugeTLB) instead of
> > PAGE_SIZE for stride, which has been done in flush_pmd/pud_tlb_range(),
> > it could reduce the loop in __flush_tlb_range().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h | 21 +++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> > index 412a3b9a3c25..25e35e6f8093 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> > @@ -360,16 +360,17 @@ static inline void __flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > dsb(ish);
> > }
> >
> > -static inline void flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > - unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> > -{
> > - /*
> > - * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
> > - * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
> > - * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
> > - */
> > - __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, PAGE_SIZE, false, 0);
> > -}
> > +/*
> > + * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
> > + * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
> > + * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
> > + */
> > +#define flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end) \
> > + __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, \
> > + ((vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGETLB) \
> > + ? huge_page_size(hstate_vma(vma)) \
> > + : PAGE_SIZE, false, 0)
> > +
>
> seems like a good idea.
>
> I wonder if a better implementation will be MMU_GATHER_PAGE_SIZE, in this case,
> we are going to support stride for other large folios as well, such as thp.
>
BTW, in most cases we have already had right stride:
arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h has already this to get stride:
static inline void tlb_flush(struct mmu_gather *tlb)
{
struct vm_area_struct vma = TLB_FLUSH_VMA(tlb->mm, 0);
bool last_level = !tlb->freed_tables;
unsigned long stride = tlb_get_unmap_size(tlb);
int tlb_level = tlb_get_level(tlb);
/*
* If we're tearing down the address space then we only care about
* invalidating the walk-cache, since the ASID allocator won't
* reallocate our ASID without invalidating the entire TLB.
*/
if (tlb->fullmm) {
if (!last_level)
flush_tlb_mm(tlb->mm);
return;
}
__flush_tlb_range(&vma, tlb->start, tlb->end, stride,
last_level, tlb_level);
}
> >
> > static inline void flush_tlb_kernel_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> > {
> > --
> > 2.41.0
> >
>
> Thanks
> Barry
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 5:29 PM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2023/7/31 16:43, Barry Song wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 4:33 PM Barry Song <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 4:14 PM Kefeng Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> It is better to use huge_page_size() for hugepage(HugeTLB) instead of
> >>> PAGE_SIZE for stride, which has been done in flush_pmd/pud_tlb_range(),
> >>> it could reduce the loop in __flush_tlb_range().
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
> >>> ---
> >>> arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h | 21 +++++++++++----------
> >>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> >>> index 412a3b9a3c25..25e35e6f8093 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
> >>> @@ -360,16 +360,17 @@ static inline void __flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> >>> dsb(ish);
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> -static inline void flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> >>> - unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> >>> -{
> >>> - /*
> >>> - * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
> >>> - * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
> >>> - * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
> >>> - */
> >>> - __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, PAGE_SIZE, false, 0);
> >>> -}
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
> >>> + * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
> >>> + * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
> >>> + */
> >>> +#define flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end) \
> >>> + __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, \
> >>> + ((vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGETLB) \
> >>> + ? huge_page_size(hstate_vma(vma)) \
> >>> + : PAGE_SIZE, false, 0)
> >>> +
> >>
> >> seems like a good idea.
> >>
> >> I wonder if a better implementation will be MMU_GATHER_PAGE_SIZE, in this case,
> >> we are going to support stride for other large folios as well, such as thp.
> >>
> >
> > BTW, in most cases we have already had right stride:
> >
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/tlb.h has already this to get stride:
>
> MMU_GATHER_PAGE_SIZE works for tlb_flush, but flush_tlb_range()
> directly called without mmu_gather, see above 3 patches is to
> use correct flush_[hugetlb/pmd/pud]_tlb_range(also there are
> some other places, like get_clear_contig_flush/clear_flush on arm64),
> so enable MMU_GATHER_PAGE_SIZE for arm64 is independent thing, right?
>
You are right. I was thinking of those zap_pte/pmd_range cases especially
for those vmas where large folios engage. but it is not very relevant.
In that case, one vma might have mixed different folio sizes.
your patch, for sure, will benefit hugetlb with arm64 contiguous bits.
Thanks
Barry
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 03:48:29PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> +/*
> + * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
> + * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
> + * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
> + */
> +#define flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end) \
> + __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, \
> + ((vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGETLB) \
> + ? huge_page_size(hstate_vma(vma)) \
> + : PAGE_SIZE, false, 0)
This won't work if we use the contiguous PTE to get 64K hugetlb pages on
a 4K base page configuration. The 16 base pages in the range would have
to be invalidated individually (the contig PTE bit is just a hint, the
hardware may or may not take it into account).
--
Catalin
On 2023/7/31 19:11, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 03:48:29PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>> +/*
>> + * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
>> + * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
>> + * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
>> + */
>> +#define flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end) \
>> + __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, \
>> + ((vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGETLB) \
>> + ? huge_page_size(hstate_vma(vma)) \
>> + : PAGE_SIZE, false, 0)
>
> This won't work if we use the contiguous PTE to get 64K hugetlb pages on
> a 4K base page configuration. The 16 base pages in the range would have
> to be invalidated individually (the contig PTE bit is just a hint, the
> hardware may or may not take it into account).
Got it, the contig huge page is depended on hardware implementation,
but for normal hugepage(2M/1G), we could use this, right?
>
On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 07:27:14PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> On 2023/7/31 19:11, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 03:48:29PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> > > +/*
> > > + * We cannot use leaf-only invalidation here, since we may be invalidating
> > > + * table entries as part of collapsing hugepages or moving page tables.
> > > + * Set the tlb_level to 0 because we can not get enough information here.
> > > + */
> > > +#define flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end) \
> > > + __flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, \
> > > + ((vma)->vm_flags & VM_HUGETLB) \
> > > + ? huge_page_size(hstate_vma(vma)) \
> > > + : PAGE_SIZE, false, 0)
> >
> > This won't work if we use the contiguous PTE to get 64K hugetlb pages on
> > a 4K base page configuration. The 16 base pages in the range would have
> > to be invalidated individually (the contig PTE bit is just a hint, the
> > hardware may or may not take it into account).
>
> Got it, the contig huge page is depended on hardware implementation,
> but for normal hugepage(2M/1G), we could use this, right?
Right. Only the pmd/pud cases.
--
Catalin