Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220518014632.922072-1-yuzhao@google.com> <20220518014632.922072-8-yuzhao@google.com>
 <CAGsJ_4yboZEY9OfyujPxBa_AEuGM3OAq5y_L9gvzSMUv70BxeQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGsJ_4w3S_8Kaw2GyB3hg7b4N_D+6yBO7D6qmgxD9Fqz3_dhAg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220607102135.GA32448@willie-the-truck> <CAGsJ_4zGEdHDv0ObZ-5y8sFKLO7Y6ZjTsZFs0KvdLwA_-iGJ5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220607104358.GA32583@willie-the-truck> <CAOUHufZh46A2hh_fn-8vVBDi_621rgbZq64_afDt8VxrzqJz1g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGsJ_4yvsXCj8snemAyX3jPJgWJR+tFCtUhV-3QJ75RNi=q_KA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHk-=wirMfOpzNavjWao5GA65ve=9LQN-6=YCUtJGRpu=ujdoA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wirMfOpzNavjWao5GA65ve=9LQN-6=YCUtJGRpu=ujdoA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 9 Jun 2022 10:45:51 +1200
Message-ID: <CAGsJ_4yLCsJJvK5QkFOk_7UW72DRO7gWnd6wdn2TWzBrTmRjSg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 07/14] mm: multi-gen LRU: exploit locality in rmap
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Michael Larabel <Michael@michaellarabel.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        LAK <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>,
        Kernel Page Reclaim v2 <page-reclaim@google.com>,
        Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>,
        Jan Alexander Steffens <heftig@archlinux.org>,
        Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>,
        Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net>,
        Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
        Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu>,
        Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Holger_Hoffst=C3=A4tte?= <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>,
        Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru>,
        Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu>,
        Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works>,
        Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com>, huzhanyuan@oppo.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 3:52 AM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 5:43 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Given we used to have a flush for clear pte young in LRU, right now we are
> > moving to nop in almost all cases for the flush unless the address becomes
> > young exactly after look_around and before ptep_clear_flush_young_notify.
> > It means we are actually dropping flush. So the question is,  were we
> > overcautious? we actually don't need the flush at all even without mglru?
>
> We stopped flushing the TLB on A bit clears on x86 back in 2014.
>
> See commit b13b1d2d8692 ("x86/mm: In the PTE swapout page reclaim case
> clear the accessed bit instead of flushing the TLB").

This is true for x86, RISC-V, powerpc and S390. but it is not true for
most platforms.

There was an attempt to do the same thing in arm64:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1793830.html
but arm64 still sent a nosync tlbi and depent on a deferred to dsb :
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1794484.html

Plus, generic code will also send a tlb flush:
int ptep_clear_flush_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
                           unsigned long address, pte_t *ptep)
{
        int young;
        young = ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, address, ptep);
        if (young)
                flush_tlb_page(vma, address);
        return young;
}

We used to use ptep_test_and_clear_young() only in rmap.c for page_referenced()
in 2.6.0:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mpe/linux-fullhistory.git/tree/mm/rmap.c?h=v2.6.0
int page_referenced(struct page * page)
{
      ...
      if (ptep_test_and_clear_young(p))
      ...
}

but in 2.6.12, it has been already ptep_clear_flush_young() in
page_referenced_one()
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mpe/linux-fullhistory.git/tree/mm/rmap.c?h=v2.6.12

I failed to find the history to figure out the motivation for 2.6.12
to use ptep_clear_flush_young()
in LRU, but I am still curious how using flush or not will affect LRU
on those platforms whose
ptep_clear_flush_young() and  ptep_test_and_clear_young() are different.

>
>                Linus

Thanks
Barry