Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.34 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.34;
Message-ID: <11601011-07af-4662-8ee4-f98785f75e29@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 4 Dec 2023 12:02:38 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 06/12] mm/gup: Drop folio_fast_pin_allowed() in hugepd
 processing
Content-Language: en-GB
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
References: <20231116012908.392077-7-peterx@redhat.com>
 <ZVsYMMJpmFV2T/Zc@infradead.org> <ZVzT5_3Zn-Y-6xth@x1n>
 <ZV21GCbG48nTLDzn@infradead.org> <ZV90JcnQ1RGud/0R@casper.infradead.org>
 <ZV-KQ0e0y9BTsHGv@x1n> <d2313c1d-1e50-49b7-bed7-840431af799a@arm.com>
 <ZV-sJsdFfXiCkylv@x1n> <510adc26-9aed-4745-8807-dba071fadbbe@arm.com>
 <ZWDKV0XNjplc_vUP@x1n> <ZWj_EgljG3NwS5r1@x1n>
 <283da12c-14f1-4255-b3c4-ab933f3373c4@csgroup.eu>
 <01aad92f-b1e0-4f31-b905-8b1c2012ebab@arm.com>
 <97c21205-f3e6-4634-82e6-c7bbd81d1835@csgroup.eu>
 <0c446883-7f01-406f-bddd-8e78b989d644@arm.com>
 <8c7fe945-ee34-4eb6-b466-5707660c7723@csgroup.eu>
From:   Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <8c7fe945-ee34-4eb6-b466-5707660c7723@csgroup.eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 04/12/2023 11:57, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 04/12/2023 à 12:46, Ryan Roberts a écrit :
>> On 04/12/2023 11:25, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 04/12/2023 à 12:11, Ryan Roberts a écrit :
>>>> On 03/12/2023 13:33, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 30/11/2023 à 22:30, Peter Xu a écrit :
>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 11:07:51AM -0500, Peter Xu wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 09:06:01AM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>>>>>>>> I don't have any micro-benchmarks for GUP though, if that's your question. Is
>>>>>>>> there an easy-to-use test I can run to get some numbers? I'd be happy to try it out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks Ryan.  Then nothing is needed to be tested if gup is not yet touched
>>>>>>> from your side, afaict.  I'll see whether I can provide some rough numbers
>>>>>>> instead in the next post (I'll probably only be able to test it in a VM,
>>>>>>> though, but hopefully that should still reflect mostly the truth).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> An update: I finished a round of 64K cont_pte test, in the slow gup micro
>>>>>> benchmark I see ~15% perf degrade with this patchset applied on a VM on top
>>>>>> of Apple M1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Frankly that's even less than I expected, considering not only how slow gup
>>>>>> THP used to be, but also on the fact that that's a tight loop over slow
>>>>>> gup, which in normal cases shouldn't happen: "present" ptes normally goes
>>>>>> to fast-gup, while !present goes into a fault following it.  I assume
>>>>>> that's why nobody cared slow gup for THP before.  I think adding cont_pte
>>>>>> support shouldn't be very hard, but that will include making cont_pte idea
>>>>>> global just for arm64 and riscv Svnapot.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there any documentation on what cont_pte is ? I have always wondered
>>>>> if it could also fit powerpc 8xx need ?
>>>>
>>>> pte_cont() (and pte_mkcont() and pte_mknoncont()) test and manipulte the
>>>> "contiguous bit" in the arm64 PTE entries. Those helpers are arm64-specific
>>>> (AFAIK). The contiguous bit is a hint to the HW to tell it that a block of PTEs
>>>> are mapping a physically contiguous and naturally aligned piece of memory. The
>>>> HW can use this to coalesce entries in the TLB. When using 4K base pages, the
>>>> contpte size is 64K (16 PTEs). For 16K base pages, its 2M (128 PTEs) and for 64K
>>>> base pages, its 2M (32 PTEs).
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On powerpc, for 16k pages, we have to define 4 consecutive PTEs. All 4
>>>>> PTE are flagged with the SPS bit telling it's a 16k pages, but for TLB
>>>>> misses the HW needs one entrie for each 4k fragment.
>>>>
>>>>   From that description, it sounds like the SPS bit might be similar to arm64
>>>> contiguous bit? Although sounds like you are currently using it in a slightly
>>>> different way - telling kernel that the base page is 16K but mapping each 16K
>>>> page with 4x 4K entries (plus the SPS bit set)?
>>>
>>> Yes it's both.
>>>
>>> When the base page is 16k, there are 4x 4k entries (with SPS bit set) in
>>> the page table, and pte_t is a table of 4 'unsigned long'
>>>
>>> When the base page is 4k, there is a 16k hugepage size, which is the
>>> same 4x 4k entries with SPS bit set.
>>>
>>> So it looks similar to the contiguous bit.
>>>
>>>
>>> And by extension, the same principle is used for 512k hugepages, the bit
>>> _PAGE_HUGE is copied by the TLB miss handler into the lower bit of PS,
>>> PS being as follows:
>>> - 00 Small (4 Kbyte or 16 Kbyte)
>>> - 01 512 Kbyte
>>> - 10 Reserved
>>> - 11 8 Mbyte
>>>
>>> So as PMD size is 4M, 512k pages are 128 identical consecutive entries
>>> in the page table.
>>>
>>> I which I could have THP with 16k or 512k pages.
>>
>> Then you have come to the right place! :)
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20231204102027.57185-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com/
>>
> 
> That looks great. That series only modifies core mm/ .
> No changes needed in arch ? Will it work on powerpc without any 
> change/additions to arch code ?

Yes there are also changes needed in arch; I have a separate series for arm64,
which transparently manages the contiguous bit when it sees appropriate PTEs:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20231204105440.61448-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com/

> 
> Well, I'll try it soon.
> 
> Christophe