On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:40:01 -0700 Roman Gushchin <guroan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> __vunmap() calls find_vm_area() twice without an obvious reason:
> first directly to get the area pointer, second indirectly by calling
> remove_vm_area(), which is again searching for the area.
>
> To remove this redundancy, let's split remove_vm_area() into
> __remove_vm_area(struct vmap_area *), which performs the actual area
> removal, and remove_vm_area(const void *addr) wrapper, which can
> be used everywhere, where it has been used before.
>
> On my test setup, I've got 5-10% speed up on vfree()'ing 1000000
> of 4-pages vmalloc blocks.
>
> Perf report before:
> 22.64% cat [kernel.vmlinux] [k] free_pcppages_bulk
> 10.30% cat [kernel.vmlinux] [k] __vunmap
> 9.80% cat [kernel.vmlinux] [k] find_vmap_area
> 8.11% cat [kernel.vmlinux] [k] vunmap_page_range
> 4.20% cat [kernel.vmlinux] [k] __slab_free
> 3.56% cat [kernel.vmlinux] [k] __list_del_entry_valid
> 3.46% cat [kernel.vmlinux] [k] smp_call_function_many
> 3.33% cat [kernel.vmlinux] [k] kfree
> 3.32% cat [kernel.vmlinux] [k] free_unref_page
>
> Perf report after:
> 23.01% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] free_pcppages_bulk
> 9.46% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __vunmap
> 9.15% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] vunmap_page_range
> 6.17% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __slab_free
> 5.61% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] kfree
> 4.86% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] bad_range
> 4.67% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] free_unref_page_commit
> 4.24% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __list_del_entry_valid
> 3.68% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] free_unref_page
> 3.65% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __list_add_valid
> 3.19% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __purge_vmap_area_lazy
> 3.10% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] find_vmap_area
> 3.05% cat [kernel.kallsyms] [k] rcu_cblist_dequeue
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -2068,6 +2068,24 @@ struct vm_struct *find_vm_area(const void *addr)
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +static struct vm_struct *__remove_vm_area(struct vmap_area *va)
> +{
> + struct vm_struct *vm = va->vm;
> +
> + might_sleep();
Where might __remove_vm_area() sleep?
>From a quick scan I'm only seeing vfree(), and that has the
might_sleep_if(!in_interrupt()).
So perhaps we can remove this...
> + spin_lock(&vmap_area_lock);
> + va->vm = NULL;
> + va->flags &= ~VM_VM_AREA;
> + va->flags |= VM_LAZY_FREE;
> + spin_unlock(&vmap_area_lock);
> +
> + kasan_free_shadow(vm);
> + free_unmap_vmap_area(va);
> +
> + return vm;
> +}
> +
