[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 04/26] hugetlb: make huge_pte_lockptr take an explicit shift argument.
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 01:51:53PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 06/24/22 17:36, James Houghton wrote:
> > This is needed to handle PTL locking with high-granularity mapping. We
> > won't always be using the PMD-level PTL even if we're using the 2M
> > hugepage hstate. It's possible that we're dealing with 4K PTEs, in which
> > case, we need to lock the PTL for the 4K PTE.
> I'm not really sure why this would be required.
> Why not use the PMD level lock for 4K PTEs? Seems that would scale better
> with less contention than using the more coarse mm lock.

Your words make me thing of another question unrelated to this patch.
We __know__ that arm64 supports continues PTE HugeTLB. huge_pte_lockptr()
did not consider this case, in this case, those HugeTLB pages are contended
with mm lock. Seems we should optimize this case. Something like:

diff --git a/include/linux/hugetlb.h b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
index 0d790fa3f297..68a1e071bfc0 100644
--- a/include/linux/hugetlb.h
+++ b/include/linux/hugetlb.h
@@ -893,7 +893,7 @@ static inline gfp_t htlb_modify_alloc_mask(struct hstate *h, gfp_t gfp_mask)
static inline spinlock_t *huge_pte_lockptr(struct hstate *h,
struct mm_struct *mm, pte_t *pte)
- if (huge_page_size(h) == PMD_SIZE)
+ if (huge_page_size(h) <= PMD_SIZE)
return pmd_lockptr(mm, (pmd_t *) pte);
VM_BUG_ON(huge_page_size(h) == PAGE_SIZE);
return &mm->page_table_lock;
I did not check if elsewhere needs to be changed as well. Just a primary


> --
> Mike Kravetz

 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-29 08:12    [W:0.221 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site