Re: Folio mapcount

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

 



On 24 Jan 2023, at 13:13, Matthew Wilcox wrote:

> Once we get to the part of the folio journey where we have
> one-pointer-per-page, we can't afford to maintain per-page state.
> Currently we maintain a per-page mapcount, and that will have to go.
> We can maintain extra state for a multi-page folio, but it has to be a
> constant amount of extra state no matter how many pages are in the folio.
>
> My proposal is that we maintain a single mapcount per folio, and its
> definition is the number of (vma, page table) tuples which have a
> reference to any pages in this folio.

How about having two, full_folio_mapcount and partial_folio_mapcount?
If partial_folio_mapcount is 0, we can have a fast path without doing
anything at page level.

>
> I think there's a good performance win and simplification to be had
> here, so I think it's worth doing for 6.4.
>
> Examples
> --------
>
> In the simple and common case where every page in a folio is mapped
> once by a single vma and single page table, mapcount would be 1 [1].
> If the folio is mapped across a page table boundary by a single VMA,
> after we take a page fault on it in one page table, it gets a mapcount
> of 1.  After taking a page fault on it in the other page table, its
> mapcount increases to 2.
>
> For a PMD-sized THP naturally aligned, mapcount is 1.  Splitting the
> PMD into PTEs would not change the mapcount; the folio remains order-9
> but it stll has a reference from only one page table (a different page
> table, but still just one).
>
> Implementation sketch
> ---------------------
>
> When we take a page fault, we can/should map every page in the folio
> that fits in this VMA and this page table.  We do this at present in
> filemap_map_pages() by looping over each page in the folio and calling
> do_set_pte() on each.  We should have a:
>
>                 do_set_pte_range(vmf, folio, addr, first_page, n);
>
> and then change the API to page_add_new_anon_rmap() / page_add_file_rmap()
> to pass in (folio, first, n) instead of page.  That gives us one call to
> page_add_*_rmap() per (vma, page table) tuple.
>
> In try_to_unmap_one(), page_vma_mapped_walk() currently calls us for
> each pfn.  We'll want a function like
>         page_vma_mapped_walk_skip_to_end_of_ptable()
> in order to persuade it to only call us once or twice if the folio
> is mapped across a page table boundary.
>
> Concerns
> --------
>
> We'll have to be careful to always zap all the PTEs for a given (vma,
> pt) tuple at the same time, otherwise mapcount will get out of sync
> (eg map three pages, unmap two; we shouldn't decrement the mapcount,
> but I don't think we can know that.  But does this ever happen?  I think
> we always unmap the entire folio, like in try_to_unmap_one().
>
> I haven't got my head around SetPageAnonExclusive() yet.  I think it can
> be a per-folio bit, but handling a folio split across two page tables
> may be tricky.
>
> Notes
> -----
>
> [1] Ignoring the bias by -1 to let us detect transitions that we care
> about more efficiently; I'm talking about the value returned from
> page_mapcount(), not the value stored in page->_mapcount.


--
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


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

  Powered by Linux