Received: by 2002:a89:48b:0:b0:1f5:f2ab:c469 with SMTP id a11csp307147lqd; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 03:01:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=3; AJvYcCUxIuyvP5hWOp6o1nlRdhlJWqJfWqCCrqqqVo79bU9YBQbgNGKQKDgqcIkopUP/cuUw0lJ9VttEkfbAkruyE/WRqzeFtwaqdcl3ncttxw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHzy2Ih82uiPY3NG0yeBKTDcrd4gXDy7GuwM4k7b8r84sfCJfwx+Ao0mV7aeFAZMcA1jc5u X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:bd8c:b0:2a6:280e:3ef7 with SMTP id z12-20020a17090abd8c00b002a6280e3ef7mr1636212pjr.22.1713952884053; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 03:01:24 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1713952884; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=QVAYlKw2Da3P/UodVMQ4zf14ejDyC2MY4n/MAbaUF7perqKf1PSSSwgLqgU7kW68Lm egRJ5y7GCsKNoA/VGmGhd8w8xmf+6wN6AEyAf6q+77fDnY1C0+XHwf8zKtXuC5i4db15 HR6l7gtmt5ijn1CXsnpSJ5dmFUsCrgltL6dIH3KSerxhWBrc9DaAr72dXBtDjVSU6658 Qnoa+5icFAtKtbFXBR1+8SGRNKPh5UriZkYbvAGXsJuQnbLMASbz/2VnOEfZ5TNLLWm9 rS9KDEAt8E2yZJZ4/WrDSX8rMKrgkuGctW4b7GtHSLEQK5k70Fz2VS/L/gV9EzfsmR+b M/9Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:list-unsubscribe :list-subscribe:list-id:precedence:date:message-id; bh=9Mt7pGISLQ8W6/Lokbo3bGtOLeYybuvQvSJF4Mq21hY=; fh=6zSiAGoAgSPa8hr0PPQjB1JgZAt8NAX3xQE/BuoU18Y=; b=KT89qcK52UdPNH89x6ZQID7+RhJZ6pWV6olRQYOnF1GNAgs0E0bMEz7jvBsKtY8B8E L3lrMZMF6wJpbK4XyCgHwlSnvR2AkRm+LNEXSTfNH0tc+u4BtU1uDpqK77hFWtzI5jHN OodchsHwrl4jk3Cf/UmXxJDAvhrbFguokqCRvQqwUPnhCDOgxNrt247iuq9NaCb11LCa vFrx7WaK36xRYiMkVQVEp1U0mvrodFZETmRP2o/f6NDepE36Ut7YFENT2IAsXo5ZHoYR /TP6aQXcMo89uRS8joz6LtasXx8d/ULM4cQL3OFHcv6cKGTIJ/Sjl/zs8jD4LaFSAf9v xNIg==; dara=google.com ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; mx.google.com; arc=pass (i=1 spf=pass spfdomain=arm.com dmarc=pass fromdomain=arm.com); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-156683-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-156683-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from sv.mirrors.kernel.org (sv.mirrors.kernel.org. [2604:1380:45e3:2400::1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pg16-20020a17090b1e1000b002acbbcc335bsi8316330pjb.63.2024.04.24.03.01.23 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 24 Apr 2024 03:01:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-156683-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; arc=pass (i=1 spf=pass spfdomain=arm.com dmarc=pass fromdomain=arm.com); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-156683-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-156683-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sv.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF7772832CE for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 10:01:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F651591EE; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 10:01:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F359D158DC9 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 10:01:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713952876; cv=none; b=FNOcnT0Jcx0Dgef6kX6iywbcpd8WsFrvprk69eptSSryB8D4YGfK1fnNm32UOpeLxZhTrc9COowHelVF3UuPU67egpE/fKPyOFyAfkN2wl68nh4ZW3FBiKmZ36MIHQ3UvX1uXSHzb70t3L0nsxPenxvVkslk8eUSmRKLEP8tZyU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713952876; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Ayqf5xfSyCRaAd+gA/yNB9x4OjrRkcwLUW/AkvRWCfw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=c0S6wfsWBLPKi/SaKBSJY5XG4hlft9YLVnXVpCeuYx/zLzYIeOEU8Ui06ab7/cVI7CA6v/W9fLxp/BcVYC18ervv48hV2QIbVhUwXQs+76OTh6s/5JMqM6u4HrOXHB3ZpZiXM+v+tKimEDvTK2TaHAm/CDn1ozx4D8JedA3WIFc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE94339; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 03:01:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.25.156] (unknown [10.1.25.156]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BFE533F73F; Wed, 24 Apr 2024 03:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5b8b22e7-6355-4b08-b5b5-1e33ebae6f16@arm.com> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:01:11 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] add mTHP support for anonymous share pages Content-Language: en-GB To: Baolin Wang , akpm@linux-foundation.org, hughd@google.com Cc: willy@infradead.org, david@redhat.com, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com, 21cnbao@gmail.com, ying.huang@intel.com, shy828301@gmail.com, ziy@nvidia.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <4b998e7d-153f-48cc-a9bb-8c84bb675581@arm.com> <80b5f87e-c156-4ccc-98f0-96f1fd864273@arm.com> From: Ryan Roberts In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 24/04/2024 10:55, Baolin Wang wrote: > > > On 2024/4/24 16:26, Ryan Roberts wrote: >> On 24/04/2024 07:55, Baolin Wang wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 2024/4/23 18:41, Ryan Roberts wrote: >>>> On 22/04/2024 08:02, Baolin Wang wrote: >>>>> Anonymous pages have already been supported for multi-size (mTHP) allocation >>>>> through commit 19eaf44954df, that can allow THP to be configured through the >>>>> sysfs interface located at >>>>> '/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/hugepage-XXkb/enabled'. >>>>> >>>>> However, the anonymous shared pages will ignore the anonymous mTHP rule >>>>> configured through the sysfs interface, and can only use the PMD-mapped >>>>> THP, that is not reasonable. Many implement anonymous page sharing through >>>>> mmap(MAP_SHARED | MAP_ANONYMOUS), especially in database usage scenarios, >>>>> therefore, users expect to apply an unified mTHP strategy for anonymous pages, >>>>> also including the anonymous shared pages, in order to enjoy the benefits of >>>>> mTHP. For example, lower latency than PMD-mapped THP, smaller memory bloat >>>>> than PMD-mapped THP, contiguous PTEs on ARM architecture to reduce TLB miss >>>>> etc. >>>> >>>> This sounds like a very useful addition! >>>> >>>> Out of interest, can you point me at any workloads (and off-the-shelf >>>> benchmarks >>>> for those workloads) that predominantly use shared anon memory? >>> >>> As far as I know, some database related workloads make extensive use of shared >>> anonymous page, such as PolarDB[1] in our Alibaba fleet, or MySQL likely also >>> uses shared anonymous memory. And I still need to do some investigation to >>> measure the performance. >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/ApsaraDB/PolarDB-for-PostgreSQL >> >> Thanks for the pointer! >> >>> >>>>> The primary strategy is that, the use of huge pages for anonymous shared pages >>>>> still follows the global control determined by the mount option "huge=" >>>>> parameter >>>>> or the sysfs interface at '/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/shmem_enabled'. >>>>> The utilization of mTHP is allowed only when the global 'huge' switch is >>>>> enabled. >>>>> Subsequently, the mTHP sysfs interface >>>>> (/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/hugepage-XXkb/enabled) >>>>> is checked to determine the mTHP size that can be used for large folio >>>>> allocation >>>>> for these anonymous shared pages. >>>> >>>> I'm not sure about this proposed control mechanism; won't it break >>>> compatibility? I could be wrong, but I don't think shmem's use of THP used to >>>> depend upon the value of /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled? So it >>> >>> Yes, I realized this after more testing. >>> >>>> doesn't make sense to me that we now depend upon the >>>> /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/hugepage-XXkb/enabled values (which by >>>> default disables all sizes except 2M, which is set to "inherit" from >>>> /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/enabled). >>>> >>>> The other problem is that shmem_enabled has a different set of options >>>> (always/never/within_size/advise/deny/force) to enabled (always/madvise/never) >>>> >>>> Perhaps it would be cleaner to do the same trick we did for enabled; Introduce >>>> /mm/transparent_hugepage/hugepage-XXkb/shmem_enabled, which can have all the >>>> same values as the top-level /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/shmem_enabled, >>>> plus the additional "inherit" option. By default all sizes will be set to >>>> "never" except 2M, which is set to "inherit". >>> >>> Sounds good to me. But I do not want to copy all same values from top-level >>> '/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/shmem_enabled': >>> always within_size advise never deny force >>> >>> For mTHP's shmem_enabled interface, we can just keep below values: >>> always within_size advise never >>> >>> Cause when checking if mTHP can be used for anon shmem, 'deny' is equal to >>> 'never', and 'force' is equal to 'always'. >> >> I'll admit it wasn't completely clear to me after reading the docs, but my rough >> understanding is: >> >>   - /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/shmem_enabled controls >>     mmap(SHARED|ANON) allocations (mostly; see rule 3) >>   - huge=... controls tmpfs allocations >>   - deny and force in shmem_enabled are equivalent to never and always for >>     mmap(SHARED|ANON) but additionally override all tmpfs mounts so they act as >>     if they were mounted with huge=never or huge=always >> >> Is that correct? If so, then I think it still makes sense to support per-size > > Correct. > >> deny/force. Certainly if a per-size control is set to "inherit" and the >> top-level control is set to deny or force, you would need that to mean something. > > IMHO, the '/mm/transparent_hugepage/hugepage-XXkb/shmem_enabled' interface > should only control the anonymous shmem. And 'huge=' controls tmpfs allocation, > so we should not use anonymous control to override tmpfs control, which seems a > little mess? I agree it would be cleaner to only handle mmap(SHARED|ANON) here, and leave the tmpfs stuff for another time. But my point is that /mm/transparent_hugepage/shmem_enabled already interferes with tmpfs if the value is deny or force. So if you have: echo deny > /mm/transparent_hugepage/shmem_enabled echo inherit > /mm/transparent_hugepage/hugepage-64kB/shmem_enabled What does that mean? > >>>> Of course the huge= mount option would also need to take a per-size option in >>>> this case. e.g. huge=2048kB:advise,64kB:always >>> >>> IMO, I do not want to change the global 'huge=' mount option, which can control >>> both anon shmem and tmpfs, but mTHP now is only applied for anon shmem. So let's >> >> How does huge= control anon shmem? I thought it was only for mounted >> filesystems; so tmpfs? Perhaps my mental model for how this works is broken... > > Sorry for noise, you are right. So this is still the reason I don't want to > change the semantics of 'huge=', which is used to control tmpfs. > >>> keep it be same with the global sysfs interface: >>> /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/shmem_enabled. >>> >>> For tmpfs large folio strategy, I plan to address it later, and we may need more >>> discussion to determine if it should follow the file large folio strategy or not >>> (no investigation now). >> >> OK. But until you get to tmpfs, you'll need an interim definition for what it >> means if a per-size control is set to "inherit" and the top-level control is set >> to deny/force. >> >>> >>> Thanks for reviewing. >> >> No problem! Thanks for doing the work! >> >>> >>>>> TODO: >>>>>    - More testing and provide some performance data. >>>>>    - Need more discussion about the large folio allocation strategy for a >>>>> 'regular >>>>> file' operation created by memfd_create(), for example using ftruncate(fd) to >>>>> specify >>>>> the 'file' size, which need to follow the anonymous mTHP rule too? >>>>>    - Do not split the large folio when share memory swap out. >>>>>    - Can swap in a large folio for share memory. >>>>> >>>>> Baolin Wang (5): >>>>>     mm: memory: extend finish_fault() to support large folio >>>>>     mm: shmem: add an 'order' parameter for shmem_alloc_hugefolio() >>>>>     mm: shmem: add THP validation for PMD-mapped THP related statistics >>>>>     mm: shmem: add mTHP support for anonymous share pages >>>>>     mm: shmem: add anonymous share mTHP counters >>>>> >>>>>    include/linux/huge_mm.h |   4 +- >>>>>    mm/huge_memory.c        |   8 ++- >>>>>    mm/memory.c             |  25 +++++++--- >>>>>    mm/shmem.c              | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- >>>>>    4 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) >>>>>