On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> Now that the rmap overhaul[1] is upstream that provides a clean interface
> for rmap batching, let's implement PTE batching during fork when processing
> PTE-mapped THPs.
> 
> This series is partially based on Ryan's previous work[2] to implement
> cont-pte support on arm64, but its a complete rewrite based on [1] to
> optimize all architectures independent of any such PTE bits, and to
> use the new rmap batching functions that simplify the code and prepare
> for further rmap accounting changes.
> 
> We collect consecutive PTEs that map consecutive pages of the same large
> folio, making sure that the other PTE bits are compatible, and (a) adjust
> the refcount only once per batch, (b) call rmap handling functions only
> once per batch and (c) perform batch PTE setting/updates.
> 
> While this series should be beneficial for adding cont-pte support on
> ARM64[2], it's one of the requirements for maintaining a total mapcount[3]
> for large folios with minimal added overhead and further changes[4] that
> build up on top of the total mapcount.

I'm currently rebasing my contpte work onto this series, and have hit a problem.
I need to expose the "size" of a pte (pte_size()) and skip forward to the start
of the next (cont)pte every time through the folio_pte_batch() loop. But
pte_next_pfn() only allows advancing by 1 pfn; I need to advance by nr pfns:


static inline int folio_pte_batch(struct folio *folio, unsigned long addr,
                pte_t *start_ptep, pte_t pte, int max_nr, bool *any_writable)
{
        unsigned long folio_end_pfn = folio_pfn(folio) + folio_nr_pages(folio);
        const pte_t *end_ptep = start_ptep + max_nr;
        pte_t expected_pte = __pte_batch_clear_ignored(pte_next_pfn(pte));
-       pte_t *ptep = start_ptep + 1;
+       pte_t *ptep = start_ptep;
+       int vfn, nr, i;
        bool writable;

        if (any_writable)
                *any_writable = false;

        VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!pte_present(pte), folio);

+       vfn = addr >> PAGE_SIZE;
+       nr = pte_size(pte);
+       nr = ALIGN_DOWN(vfn + nr, nr) - vfn;
+       ptep += nr;
+
        while (ptep != end_ptep) {
+               pte = ptep_get(ptep);
                nr = pte_size(pte);
                if (any_writable)
                        writable = !!pte_write(pte);
                pte = __pte_batch_clear_ignored(pte);

                if (!pte_same(pte, expected_pte))
                        break;

                /*
                 * Stop immediately once we reached the end of the folio. In
                 * corner cases the next PFN might fall into a different
                 * folio.
                 */
-               if (pte_pfn(pte) == folio_end_pfn)
+               if (pte_pfn(pte) >= folio_end_pfn)
                        break;

                if (any_writable)
                        *any_writable |= writable;

-               expected_pte = pte_next_pfn(expected_pte);
-               ptep++;
+               for (i = 0; i < nr; i++)
+                       expected_pte = pte_next_pfn(expected_pte);
+               ptep += nr;
        }

        return ptep - start_ptep;
}


So I'm wondering if instead of enabling pte_next_pfn() for all the arches,
perhaps its actually better to expose pte_pgprot() for all the arches. Then we
can be much more flexible about generating ptes with pfn_pte(pfn, pgprot).

What do you think?


Reply via email to