* Andrew Morton [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 16:52:29 +0300
"Kirill A. Shutemov" [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Clearing a 2MB huge page will typically blow away several levels of CPU
caches.  To avoid this only cache clear the 4K area around the fault
address and use a cache avoiding clears for the rest of the 2MB area.

This patchset implements cache avoiding version of clear_page only for
x86. If an architecture wants to provide cache avoiding version of
clear_page it should to define ARCH_HAS_USER_NOCACHE to 1 and implement
clear_page_nocache() and clear_user_highpage_nocache().

Patchset looks nice to me, but the changelogs are terribly 
short of performance measurements.  For this sort of change I 
do think it is important that pretty exhaustive testing be 
performed, and that the results (or a readable summary of 
them) be shown.  And that testing should be designed to probe 
for slowdowns, not just the speedups!

That is my general impression as well.

Firstly, doing before/after "perf stat --repeat 3 ..." runs 
showing a statistically significant effect on a workload that is 
expected to win from this, and on a workload expected to be 
hurting from this would go a long way towards convincing me.

Secondly, if you can find some user-space simulation of the 
intended positive (and negative) effects then a 'perf bench' 
testcase designed to show weakness of any such approach, running 
the very kernel assembly code in user-space would also be rather 
useful.

See:

comet:~/tip> git grep x86 tools/perf/bench/ | grep inclu
tools/perf/bench/mem-memcpy-arch.h:#include "mem-memcpy-x86-64-asm-def.h"
tools/perf/bench/mem-memcpy-x86-64-asm.S:#include "../../../arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S"
tools/perf/bench/mem-memcpy.c:#include "mem-memcpy-x86-64-asm-def.h"
tools/perf/bench/mem-memset-arch.h:#include "mem-memset-x86-64-asm-def.h"
tools/perf/bench/mem-memset-x86-64-asm.S:#include "../../../arch/x86/lib/memset_64.S"
tools/perf/bench/mem-memset.c:#include "mem-memset-x86-64-asm-def.h"

that code uses the kernel-side assembly code and runs it in 
user-space.

Although obviously clearing pages on page faults needs some care 
to properly simulate in user-space.

Without repeatable hard numbers such code just gets into the 
kernel and bitrots there as new CPU generations come in - a few 
years down the line the original decisions often degrade to pure 
noise. We've been there, we've done that, we don't want to 
repeat it.

Thanks,

	Ingo