[PATCH 1/2] THP: avoid lock when check whether THP is in deferred list

[Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@xxxxxxxxx>]

free_transhuge_page() acquires split queue lock then check
wether the THP was added to deferred list or not.

It's safe to check whether the THP is in deferred list or not.
   When code hit free_transhuge_page(), there is no one tries
   to update the folio's _deferred_list.

   If folio is not in deferred_list, it's safe to check without
   acquiring lock.

   If folio is in deferred_list, the other node in deferred_list
   adding/deleteing doesn't impact the return value of
   list_epmty(@folio->_deferred_list).

Running page_fault1 of will-it-scale + order 2 folio for anonymous
mapping with 96 processes on an Ice Lake 48C/96T test box, we could
see the 61% split_queue_lock contention:
-   71.28%     0.35%  page_fault1_pro  [kernel.kallsyms]           [k]
    release_pages
   - 70.93% release_pages
      - 61.42% free_transhuge_page
         + 60.77% _raw_spin_lock_irqsave

With this patch applied, the split_queue_lock contention is less
than 1%.

Signed-off-by: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 mm/huge_memory.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index b0252b418ef01..802082531e606 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -2842,12 +2842,25 @@ void free_transhuge_page(struct page *page)
 	struct deferred_split *ds_queue = get_deferred_split_queue(folio);
 	unsigned long flags;
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock, flags);
-	if (!list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list)) {
+	/*
+	 * At this point, there is no one trying to queue the folio
+	 * to deferred_list. folio->_deferred_list is not possible
+	 * being updated.
+	 *
+	 * If folio is already added to deferred_list, add/delete to/from
+	 * deferred_list will not impact list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list).
+	 * It's safe to check list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list) without
+	 * acquiring the lock.
+	 *
+	 * If folio is not in deferred_list, it's safe to check without
+	 * acquiring the lock.
+	 */
+	if (data_race(!list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list))) {
+		spin_lock_irqsave(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock, flags);
 		ds_queue->split_queue_len--;
 		list_del(&folio->_deferred_list);
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock, flags);
 	}
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock, flags);
 	free_compound_page(page);
 }
 
-- 
2.30.2