Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: add PageWaiters bit to indicate waitqueue should be checked

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 06:50:35PM +1100, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:31:57 +0300
> "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 06:03:46PM +1100, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > > Add a new page flag, PageWaiters. This bit is always set when the
> > > page has waiters on page_waitqueue(page), within the same synchronization
> > > scope as waitqueue_active(page) (i.e., it is manipulated under waitqueue
> > > lock). It may be set in some cases where that condition is not true
> > > (e.g., some scenarios of hash collisions or signals waking page waiters).
> > > 
> > > This bit can be used to avoid the costly waitqueue_active test for most
> > > cases where the page has no waiters (the hashed address effectively adds
> > > another line of cache footprint for most page operations). In cases where
> > > the bit is set when the page has no waiters, the slower wakeup path will
> > > end up clearing up the bit.
> > > 
> > > The generic bit-waitqueue infrastructure is no longer used for pages, and
> > > instead waitqueues are used directly with a custom key type. The generic
> > > code was not flexible enough to do PageWaiters manipulation under waitqueue
> > > lock, or always allow danging bits to be cleared when no waiters for this
> > > page on the waitqueue.
> > > 
> > > The upshot is that the page wait is much more flexible now, and could be
> > > easily extended to wait on other properties of the page (by carrying that
> > > data in the wait key).
> > > 
> > > This improves the performance of a streaming write into a preallocated
> > > tmpfs file by 2.2% on a POWER8 system with 64K pages (which is pretty
> > > significant if there is only a single unlock_page per 64K of copy_from_user).
> > > 
> > > Idea seems to have been around for a while, https://lwn.net/Articles/233391/
> > > 
> > > ---
> > >  include/linux/page-flags.h     |   2 +
> > >  include/linux/pagemap.h        |  23 +++---
> > >  include/trace/events/mmflags.h |   1 +
> > >  mm/filemap.c                   | 157 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> > >  mm/swap.c                      |   2 +
> > >  5 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/page-flags.h b/include/linux/page-flags.h
> > > index 58d30b8..da40a1d 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/page-flags.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/page-flags.h
> > > @@ -73,6 +73,7 @@
> > >   */
> > >  enum pageflags {
> > >  	PG_locked,		/* Page is locked. Don't touch. */
> > > +	PG_waiters,		/* Page has waiters, check its waitqueue */
> > >  	PG_error,
> > >  	PG_referenced,
> > >  	PG_uptodate,
> > > @@ -255,6 +256,7 @@ static inline int TestClearPage##uname(struct page *page) { return 0; }
> > >  	TESTSETFLAG_FALSE(uname) TESTCLEARFLAG_FALSE(uname)
> > >  
> > >  __PAGEFLAG(Locked, locked, PF_NO_TAIL)
> > > +PAGEFLAG(Waiters, waiters, PF_NO_COMPOUND) __CLEARPAGEFLAG(Waiters, waiters, PF_NO_COMPOUND)  
> > 
> > This should be at least PF_NO_TAIL to work with shmem/tmpfs huge pages.
> 
> I thought all paths using it already took the head page, but I'll double
> check. Did you see a specific problem?

PF_NO_COMPOUND doesn't allow both head and tail pages.
CONFIG_DEBUG_VM_PGFLAGS=y will make it expode.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]