Re: [PATCH v5] mm: support madvise(MADV_FREE)

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

 



On 04/20/2014 09:56 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:

In summary, MADV_FREE is about 2 time faster than MADV_DONTNEED.

This is awesome.

I have a few nitpicks with the patch, though :)

+static long madvise_lazyfree(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+			     struct vm_area_struct **prev,
+			     unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
+{
+	*prev = vma;
+	if (vma->vm_flags & (VM_LOCKED|VM_HUGETLB|VM_PFNMAP))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	/* MADV_FREE works for only anon vma at the moment */
+	if (vma->vm_file)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	lazyfree_range(vma, start, end - start);
+	return 0;
+}

This code checks whether lazyfree_range would work on
the VMA...

diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
index c4b5bc250820..ca427f258204 100644
--- a/mm/memory.c
+++ b/mm/memory.c
@@ -1270,6 +1270,104 @@ static inline unsigned long zap_pud_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
  	return addr;
  }

+static unsigned long lazyfree_pte_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
+				struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
+				unsigned long addr, unsigned long end)
+{
+	struct mm_struct *mm = tlb->mm;
+	spinlock_t *ptl;
+	pte_t *start_pte;
+	pte_t *pte;
+
+	start_pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
+	pte = start_pte;
+	arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode();
+	do {
+		pte_t ptent = *pte;
+
+		if (pte_none(ptent))
+			continue;
+
+		if (!pte_present(ptent))
+			continue;
+
+		ptent = pte_mkold(ptent);
+		ptent = pte_mkclean(ptent);
+		set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, ptent);
+		tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, pte, addr);

This may not work on PPC, which has a weird hash table for
its TLB. You will find that tlb_remove_tlb_entry does
nothing for PPC64, and set_pte_at does not remove the hash
table entry either.

@@ -1370,6 +1485,31 @@ void unmap_vmas(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
  }

  /**
+ * lazyfree_range - clear dirty bit of pte in a given range
+ * @vma: vm_area_struct holding the applicable pages
+ * @start: starting address of pages
+ * @size: number of bytes to do lazyfree
+ *
+ * Caller must protect the VMA list
+ */
+void lazyfree_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long start,
+		unsigned long size)
+{
+	struct mm_struct *mm = vma->vm_mm;
+	struct mmu_gather tlb;
+	unsigned long end = start + size;
+
+	lru_add_drain();
+	tlb_gather_mmu(&tlb, mm, start, end);
+	update_hiwater_rss(mm);
+	mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(mm, start, end);
+	for ( ; vma && vma->vm_start < end; vma = vma->vm_next)
+		lazyfree_single_vma(&tlb, vma, start, end);
+	mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end(mm, start, end);
+	tlb_finish_mmu(&tlb, start, end);
+}

This function, called by madvise_lazyfree, can iterate
over multiple VMAs.

However, madvise_lazyfree only checked one of them.

What should happen when the code encounters a VMA where
MADV_FREE does not work?  Should it return an error?
Should it skip over it?

--
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]