Thread (12 messages) 12 messages, 3 authors, 2024-01-17

Re: [RFC PATCH v1] mm/filemap: Allow arch to request folio size for exec memory

From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Date: 2024-01-15 09:33:39
Also in: linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, lkml

On 13/01/2024 00:11, Barry Song wrote:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 12:04 PM Matthew Wilcox [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 11:54:23AM +1300, Barry Song wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
Perhaps an alternative would be to double ra->size and set ra->async_size to
(ra->size / 2)? That would ensure we always have 64K aligned blocks but would
give us an async portion so readahead can still happen.
this might be worth to try as PMD is exactly doing this because async
can decrease
the latency of subsequent page faults.

#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
        /* Use the readahead code, even if readahead is disabled */
        if (vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE) {
                fpin = maybe_unlock_mmap_for_io(vmf, fpin);
                ractl._index &= ~((unsigned long)HPAGE_PMD_NR - 1);
                ra->size = HPAGE_PMD_NR;
                /*
                 * Fetch two PMD folios, so we get the chance to actually
                 * readahead, unless we've been told not to.
                 */
                if (!(vm_flags & VM_RAND_READ))
                        ra->size *= 2;
                ra->async_size = HPAGE_PMD_NR;
                page_cache_ra_order(&ractl, ra, HPAGE_PMD_ORDER);
                return fpin;
        }
#endif
BTW, rather than simply always reading backwards,  we did something very
"ugly" to simulate "read-around" for CONT-PTE exec before[1]

if page faults happen in the first half of cont-pte, we read this 64KiB
and its previous 64KiB. otherwise, we read it and its next 64KiB.
I actually tried something very similar to this while prototyping. I found that
it was about 10% less effective at getting text into 64K folios as the approach
I posted. I didn't investigate why, as I came to the conclusion that text
unlikely benefits from readahead anyway.
quoted
I don't think that makes sense.  The CPU executes instructions forwards,
not "around".  I honestly think we should treat text as "random access"
because function A calls function B and functions A and B might well be
very far apart from each other.  The only time I see you actually
getting "readahead" hits is if a function is split across two pages (for
whatever size of page), but that's a false hit!  The function is not,
generally, 64kB long, so doing readahead is no more likely to bring in
the next page of text that we want than reading any other random page.
it seems you are in favor of Ryan's modification even for filesystems
which don't support large mapping?
quoted
Unless somebody finds the GNU Rope source code from 1998, or recreates it:
https://lwn.net/1998/1029/als/rope.html
Then we might actually have some locality.

Did you actually benchmark what you did?  Is there really some locality
between the code at offset 256-288kB in the file and then in the range
192kB-256kB?
I really didn't have benchmark data, at that point I was like,
instinctively didn’t
want to break the logic of read-around, so made the code just that.
The info your provide makes me re-think if the read-around code is necessary,
thanks!
As a quick experiment, I modified my thpmaps script to collect data *only* for
executable mappings. This is run *without* my change:

| File-backed exec folios |    Speedometer | Kernel Compile |
|=========================|================|================|
|file-thp-aligned-16kB    |            56% |            46% |
|file-thp-aligned-32kB    |             2% |             3% |
|file-thp-aligned-64kB    |             4% |             5% |
|file-thp-unaligned-16kB  |             0% |             3% |
|file-thp-unaligned-128kB |             2% |             0% |
|file-thp-partial         |             0% |             0% |

It's implied that the rest of the memory (up to 100%) is small (single page)
folios. I think the only reason we would see small folios is if we would
otherwise run off the end of the file?

If so, then I think any text in folios > 16K is a rough proxy for how effective
readahead is for text: Not very.

Intuitively, I agree with Matthew that readahead doesn't make much sense for
text, and this rough data seems to agree.

was using filesystems without large-mapping support but worked around
the problem by
1. preparing 16*n normals pages
2. insert normal pages into xa
3. let filesystem read 16 normal pages
4. after all IO completion, transform 16 pages into mTHP and reinsert
mTHP to xa
I had a go at something like this too, but was doing it in the dynamic loader
and having it do MADV_COLLAPSE to generate PMD-sized THPs for the text. I
actaully found this to be even faster for the use cases I was measuring. But of
course its using more memory due to the 2M page size, and I expect it is slowing
down app load time because it is potentially reading in a lot more text than is
actually faulting. Ultimately I think the better strategy is to make the
filesystems large folio capable.
that was very painful and finally made no improvement probably because
of due to various sync overhead. so  ran away and didn't dig more data.

Thanks
Barry

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help