On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 1:52 AM David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 06.05.24 23:13, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > A lot of intricacies go into updating the stats when adding or removing
> > mappings: which stat index to use and which function. Abstract this away
> > into a new static helper in rmap.c, __folio_mod_stat().
> >
> > This adds an unnecessary call to folio_test_anon() in
> > __folio_add_anon_rmap() and __folio_add_file_rmap(). However, the folio
> > struct should already be in the cache at this point, so it shouldn't
> > cause any noticeable overhead.
>
> Depending on the inlining, we might have more branches that could be avoided
> (especially in folio_add_new_anon_rmap()).
>
> [the rmap code is more performance-sensitive and relevant than you might think]
I thought about making the helper __always_inline. Would that be better?
>
> >
> > No functional change intended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > This applies on top of "mm: do not update memcg stats for
> > NR_{FILE/SHMEM}_PMDMAPPED":
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240506192924.271999-1-yosryahmed@xxxxxxxxxx/
> >
> > David, I was on the fence about adding a Suggested-by here. You did
> > suggest adding a helper, but the one with the extra folio_test_anon()
> > was my idea and I didn't want to blame it on you. So I'll leave this up
> > to you :)
>
> :) fair enough! It's a clear improvement to readability.
>
> [...]
> >
> > - if (nr_pmdmapped) {
> > - /* NR_{FILE/SHMEM}_PMDMAPPED are not maintained per-memcg */
> > - if (folio_test_anon(folio))
> > - __lruvec_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_ANON_THPS, -nr_pmdmapped);
> > - else
> > - __mod_node_page_state(pgdat,
> > - folio_test_swapbacked(folio) ?
> > - NR_SHMEM_PMDMAPPED : NR_FILE_PMDMAPPED,
> > - -nr_pmdmapped);
> > - }
> > if (nr) {
> > - idx = folio_test_anon(folio) ? NR_ANON_MAPPED : NR_FILE_MAPPED;
> > - __lruvec_stat_mod_folio(folio, idx, -nr);
> > -
>
>
> We can now even do:
>
> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
> index 9ed995da4709..7a147195e512 100644
> --- a/mm/rmap.c
> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
> @@ -1555,18 +1555,17 @@ static __always_inline void __folio_remove_rmap(struct folio *folio,
> break;
> }
>
> - if (nr) {
> - /*
> - * Queue anon large folio for deferred split if at least one
> - * page of the folio is unmapped and at least one page
> - * is still mapped.
> - *
> - * Check partially_mapped first to ensure it is a large folio.
> - */
> - if (folio_test_anon(folio) && partially_mapped &&
> - list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list))
> - deferred_split_folio(folio);
> - }
> + /*
> + * Queue anon large folio for deferred split if at least one
> + * page of the folio is unmapped and at least one page
> + * is still mapped.
> + *
> + * Check partially_mapped first to ensure it is a large folio.
> + */
> + if (folio_test_anon(folio) && partially_mapped &&
> + list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list))
> + deferred_split_folio(folio);
> +
Dumb question: why is it okay to remove the 'if (nr)' condition here?
It seems to me by looking at the code in case RMAP_LEVEL_PMD that it
is possible for partially_mapped to be true while nr == 0.
Is this practically impossible for some reason, or is adding the folio
to the deferred split queue okay either way?
> __folio_mod_stat(folio, nr, nr_pmdmapped);
>
> /*
>
>
> Which will help some of my upcoming patches.
>
> Feel free to include that in a v2, otherwise I'll include it in an upcoming
> patch series.
>
>
> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks!
