From patchwork Mon Dec 26 07:08:45 2022 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Lorenzo Stoakes X-Patchwork-Id: 13081667 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEA3CC4332F for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 07:09:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 37DD4900002; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 02:09:01 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 306F0940007; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 02:09:01 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 0E3BC900005; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 02:09:01 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2B87900002 for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 02:09:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin30.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B001C40112 for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 07:09:00 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80283580440.30.57E80E1 Received: from mail-wm1-f52.google.com (mail-wm1-f52.google.com [209.85.128.52]) by imf22.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C739C0009 for ; Mon, 26 Dec 2022 07:08:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=COIP09nz; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of lstoakes@gmail.com designates 209.85.128.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=lstoakes@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1672038539; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=hsQ3PVyHluT/yCnNuV21tE+bhfIKFkdTspvydZvWvaunWmyefqQoYNrbNnvjEIkJ+8G54D Z8GSk2fD3+X1BOhTAkA5OElcAqoAQeuga2Pun18FgtOJfeV6xfILe7lKmC67GUBIkaHRzc xzZANCzOyvcSGNBGxh7mr5agsm5B87E= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=COIP09nz; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of lstoakes@gmail.com designates 209.85.128.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=lstoakes@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1672038539; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=VLkOKeT4uIbBG6ss89Hd1tlt6NrDYEFm7lc6id39hK0=; b=Mo7UcP95SBTo+NXjTgsLfX1hCvfupe7Yw1cqYS+QGO0WqZv5XysjxkpzNLqMfwgF0fpB8j itwSsGqtD+2bntNCnerQxLWW6TOpW/RbnvYRu4Gf28fQllX+PdxJzlqtERell8yPiSXWm3 GrCiNdby4EW1oo98/0NWlhLmXn1+E2Y= Received: by mail-wm1-f52.google.com with SMTP id m8-20020a05600c3b0800b003d96f801c48so4522047wms.0 for ; Sun, 25 Dec 2022 23:08:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=VLkOKeT4uIbBG6ss89Hd1tlt6NrDYEFm7lc6id39hK0=; b=COIP09nzy7+WUYXb67bPQBEcKY4WAGn4puhgDZEh04apbH19KfM9H1dsABye7DhxTw FcWexp+CZ1yPBvzB3gThuuvGnsUcxWJETv9ECDBq5SQueQBppS/y5bp8dLPVpHIRPh3u OzTvikrsG+tqvQVA47m3QWGzo51Z13zp17Q1VU1y11ZTdBZyVg2TBquWulrrm1vmSK4w cMxegFalPOk25gfuMt7Amed0iIr27PXL220rYePTzze2cak5eR7QaMygByv8H60iozZP of3oxLkhX2kimQnE0T7Emyam4xJhzo07UxWThIyyxJIzM2X/2MKnNbeGDvZxqOFL7Pze DKQg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=VLkOKeT4uIbBG6ss89Hd1tlt6NrDYEFm7lc6id39hK0=; b=REthbHQDK9qEsmRr4yZQd4M4oRu+SfkcyBBVzff5h4uXyzXmbbJBvKgGSYKLPycMlt isoCitRUN76q+m28Uzhxyacxb3WwqGLs/uGFtGZwvHRXfcd2d0ofYxhstovxqoHqYo+W r1pWe35k0D2eLmEJ9u8mq+vrTrI+haajMy12oScemvzFCBPLWgj8EaB973DhgQ18nczF gdk4kyYqMMbfMiJ/zuusIddz1jy4ieZO3Seb/7juzGdBROQbXJT3F2Cer3LArhQEpNuv eq7CMtb+h5cbubAKNaSkUhC3y+blYC6sCewzmbGEaz7cX/9gKPnWcuOxQDaqMI1bIbzk tT4g== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kon6hiHAjcyFUr8YcP6PnkbFxV4OsRwO99kerpn590y79q3PNyj VDILM3O358olayIIGLieu1NNN1lWVm4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXvidvUPEzQDnVzwN9qFcNFQbsFT1dSF8jp/geRaOFD/4l6Jf0gcoX25KRTXIAC1rvlKHefHzw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3ba7:b0:3d3:4dac:aa69 with SMTP id n39-20020a05600c3ba700b003d34dacaa69mr12243687wms.36.1672038537308; Sun, 25 Dec 2022 23:08:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from lucifer.home ([2a00:23c5:dc8c:8701:1663:9a35:5a7b:1d76]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id e16-20020a05600c4e5000b003c21ba7d7d6sm13191456wmq.44.2022.12.25.23.08.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 25 Dec 2022 23:08:56 -0800 (PST) From: Lorenzo Stoakes To: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Hugh Dickins , Vlastimil Babka , Liam Howlett , William Kucharski , Christian Brauner , Jonathan Corbet , Mike Rapoport , Joel Fernandes , Lorenzo Stoakes Subject: [PATCH v2 2/4] mm: mlock: use folios and a folio batch internally Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2022 07:08:45 +0000 Message-Id: <03ac78b416be5a361b79464acc3da7f93b9c37e8.1672038314.git.lstoakes@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.0 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 0C739C0009 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Stat-Signature: a61d5iw6z88b7n8s8cus771jd8noemcz X-HE-Tag: 1672038538-159320 X-HE-Meta: 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 bVqrhM8W U1B06CDsvBXIvn5zVqWdtpGZhT8LNhyCedY0JEbbnsB6S3WAvtE3Y4lLBJ71MvIyzz4vP8YDGDrjktVzJ2Fd6CeVxbKatj48s2tDDF9fHVzVcAlG/NsNeTA4/6mIjmBzm5eEm X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: This brings mlock in line with the folio batches declared in mm/swap.c and makes the code more consistent across the two. The existing mechanism for identifying which operation each folio in the batch is undergoing is maintained, i.e. using the lower 2 bits of the struct folio address (previously struct page address). This should continue to function correctly as folios remain at least system word-aligned. All invoctions of mlock() pass either a non-compound page or the head of a THP-compound page and no tail pages need updating so this functionality works with struct folios being used internally rather than struct pages. In this patch the external interface is kept identical to before in order to maintain separation between patches in the series, using a rather awkward conversion from struct page to struct folio in relevant functions. However, this maintenance of the existing interface is intended to be temporary - the next patch in the series will update the interfaces to accept folios directly. Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes --- mm/mlock.c | 238 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------- 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+), 118 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/mlock.c b/mm/mlock.c index 7032f6dd0ce1..e9ba47fe67ed 100644 --- a/mm/mlock.c +++ b/mm/mlock.c @@ -28,12 +28,12 @@ #include "internal.h" -struct mlock_pvec { +struct mlock_fbatch { local_lock_t lock; - struct pagevec vec; + struct folio_batch fbatch; }; -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct mlock_pvec, mlock_pvec) = { +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct mlock_fbatch, mlock_fbatch) = { .lock = INIT_LOCAL_LOCK(lock), }; @@ -48,192 +48,192 @@ bool can_do_mlock(void) EXPORT_SYMBOL(can_do_mlock); /* - * Mlocked pages are marked with PageMlocked() flag for efficient testing + * Mlocked folios are marked with the PG_mlocked flag for efficient testing * in vmscan and, possibly, the fault path; and to support semi-accurate * statistics. * - * An mlocked page [PageMlocked(page)] is unevictable. As such, it will - * be placed on the LRU "unevictable" list, rather than the [in]active lists. - * The unevictable list is an LRU sibling list to the [in]active lists. - * PageUnevictable is set to indicate the unevictable state. + * An mlocked folio [folio_test_mlocked(folio)] is unevictable. As such, it + * will be ostensibly placed on the LRU "unevictable" list (actually no such + * list exists), rather than the [in]active lists. PG_unevictable is set to + * indicate the unevictable state. */ -static struct lruvec *__mlock_page(struct page *page, struct lruvec *lruvec) +static struct lruvec *__mlock_folio(struct folio *folio, struct lruvec *lruvec) { /* There is nothing more we can do while it's off LRU */ - if (!TestClearPageLRU(page)) + if (!folio_test_clear_lru(folio)) return lruvec; - lruvec = folio_lruvec_relock_irq(page_folio(page), lruvec); + lruvec = folio_lruvec_relock_irq(folio, lruvec); - if (unlikely(page_evictable(page))) { + if (unlikely(folio_evictable(folio))) { /* - * This is a little surprising, but quite possible: - * PageMlocked must have got cleared already by another CPU. - * Could this page be on the Unevictable LRU? I'm not sure, - * but move it now if so. + * This is a little surprising, but quite possible: PG_mlocked + * must have got cleared already by another CPU. Could this + * folio be unevictable? I'm not sure, but move it now if so. */ - if (PageUnevictable(page)) { - del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec); - ClearPageUnevictable(page); - add_page_to_lru_list(page, lruvec); + if (folio_test_unevictable(folio)) { + lruvec_del_folio(lruvec, folio); + folio_clear_unevictable(folio); + lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio); + __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGRESCUED, - thp_nr_pages(page)); + folio_nr_pages(folio)); } goto out; } - if (PageUnevictable(page)) { - if (PageMlocked(page)) - page->mlock_count++; + if (folio_test_unevictable(folio)) { + if (folio_test_mlocked(folio)) + folio->mlock_count++; goto out; } - del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec); - ClearPageActive(page); - SetPageUnevictable(page); - page->mlock_count = !!PageMlocked(page); - add_page_to_lru_list(page, lruvec); - __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGCULLED, thp_nr_pages(page)); + lruvec_del_folio(lruvec, folio); + folio_clear_active(folio); + folio_set_unevictable(folio); + folio->mlock_count = !!folio_test_mlocked(folio); + lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio); + __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGCULLED, folio_nr_pages(folio)); out: - SetPageLRU(page); + folio_set_lru(folio); return lruvec; } -static struct lruvec *__mlock_new_page(struct page *page, struct lruvec *lruvec) +static struct lruvec *__mlock_new_folio(struct folio *folio, struct lruvec *lruvec) { - VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageLRU(page), page); + VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_lru(folio), folio); - lruvec = folio_lruvec_relock_irq(page_folio(page), lruvec); + lruvec = folio_lruvec_relock_irq(folio, lruvec); /* As above, this is a little surprising, but possible */ - if (unlikely(page_evictable(page))) + if (unlikely(folio_evictable(folio))) goto out; - SetPageUnevictable(page); - page->mlock_count = !!PageMlocked(page); - __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGCULLED, thp_nr_pages(page)); + folio_set_unevictable(folio); + folio->mlock_count = !!folio_test_mlocked(folio); + __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGCULLED, folio_nr_pages(folio)); out: - add_page_to_lru_list(page, lruvec); - SetPageLRU(page); + lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio); + folio_set_lru(folio); return lruvec; } -static struct lruvec *__munlock_page(struct page *page, struct lruvec *lruvec) +static struct lruvec *__munlock_folio(struct folio *folio, struct lruvec *lruvec) { - int nr_pages = thp_nr_pages(page); + int nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio); bool isolated = false; - if (!TestClearPageLRU(page)) + if (!folio_test_clear_lru(folio)) goto munlock; isolated = true; - lruvec = folio_lruvec_relock_irq(page_folio(page), lruvec); + lruvec = folio_lruvec_relock_irq(folio, lruvec); - if (PageUnevictable(page)) { + if (folio_test_unevictable(folio)) { /* Then mlock_count is maintained, but might undercount */ - if (page->mlock_count) - page->mlock_count--; - if (page->mlock_count) + if (folio->mlock_count) + folio->mlock_count--; + if (folio->mlock_count) goto out; } /* else assume that was the last mlock: reclaim will fix it if not */ munlock: - if (TestClearPageMlocked(page)) { - __mod_zone_page_state(page_zone(page), NR_MLOCK, -nr_pages); - if (isolated || !PageUnevictable(page)) + if (folio_test_clear_mlocked(folio)) { + zone_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_MLOCK, -nr_pages); + if (isolated || !folio_test_unevictable(folio)) __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGMUNLOCKED, nr_pages); else __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGSTRANDED, nr_pages); } - /* page_evictable() has to be checked *after* clearing Mlocked */ - if (isolated && PageUnevictable(page) && page_evictable(page)) { - del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec); - ClearPageUnevictable(page); - add_page_to_lru_list(page, lruvec); + /* folio_evictable() has to be checked *after* clearing Mlocked */ + if (isolated && folio_test_unevictable(folio) && folio_evictable(folio)) { + lruvec_del_folio(lruvec, folio); + folio_clear_unevictable(folio); + lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio); __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGRESCUED, nr_pages); } out: if (isolated) - SetPageLRU(page); + folio_set_lru(folio); return lruvec; } /* - * Flags held in the low bits of a struct page pointer on the mlock_pvec. + * Flags held in the low bits of a struct folio pointer on the mlock_fbatch. */ #define LRU_PAGE 0x1 #define NEW_PAGE 0x2 -static inline struct page *mlock_lru(struct page *page) +static inline struct folio *mlock_lru(struct folio *folio) { - return (struct page *)((unsigned long)page + LRU_PAGE); + return (struct folio *)((unsigned long)folio + LRU_PAGE); } -static inline struct page *mlock_new(struct page *page) +static inline struct folio *mlock_new(struct folio *folio) { - return (struct page *)((unsigned long)page + NEW_PAGE); + return (struct folio *)((unsigned long)folio + NEW_PAGE); } /* - * mlock_pagevec() is derived from pagevec_lru_move_fn(): - * perhaps that can make use of such page pointer flags in future, - * but for now just keep it for mlock. We could use three separate - * pagevecs instead, but one feels better (munlocking a full pagevec - * does not need to drain mlocking pagevecs first). + * mlock_folio_batch() is derived from folio_batch_move_lru(): perhaps that can + * make use of such page pointer flags in future, but for now just keep it for + * mlock. We could use three separate folio batches instead, but one feels + * better (munlocking a full folio batch does not need to drain mlocking folio + * batches first). */ -static void mlock_pagevec(struct pagevec *pvec) +static void mlock_folio_batch(struct folio_batch *fbatch) { struct lruvec *lruvec = NULL; unsigned long mlock; - struct page *page; + struct folio *folio; int i; - for (i = 0; i < pagevec_count(pvec); i++) { - page = pvec->pages[i]; - mlock = (unsigned long)page & (LRU_PAGE | NEW_PAGE); - page = (struct page *)((unsigned long)page - mlock); - pvec->pages[i] = page; + for (i = 0; i < folio_batch_count(fbatch); i++) { + folio = fbatch->folios[i]; + mlock = (unsigned long)folio & (LRU_PAGE | NEW_PAGE); + folio = (struct folio *)((unsigned long)folio - mlock); + fbatch->folios[i] = folio; if (mlock & LRU_PAGE) - lruvec = __mlock_page(page, lruvec); + lruvec = __mlock_folio(folio, lruvec); else if (mlock & NEW_PAGE) - lruvec = __mlock_new_page(page, lruvec); + lruvec = __mlock_new_folio(folio, lruvec); else - lruvec = __munlock_page(page, lruvec); + lruvec = __munlock_folio(folio, lruvec); } if (lruvec) unlock_page_lruvec_irq(lruvec); - release_pages(pvec->pages, pvec->nr); - pagevec_reinit(pvec); + release_pages(fbatch->folios, fbatch->nr); + folio_batch_reinit(fbatch); } void mlock_page_drain_local(void) { - struct pagevec *pvec; + struct folio_batch *fbatch; - local_lock(&mlock_pvec.lock); - pvec = this_cpu_ptr(&mlock_pvec.vec); - if (pagevec_count(pvec)) - mlock_pagevec(pvec); - local_unlock(&mlock_pvec.lock); + local_lock(&mlock_fbatch.lock); + fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&mlock_fbatch.fbatch); + if (folio_batch_count(fbatch)) + mlock_folio_batch(fbatch); + local_unlock(&mlock_fbatch.lock); } void mlock_page_drain_remote(int cpu) { - struct pagevec *pvec; + struct folio_batch *fbatch; WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_online(cpu)); - pvec = &per_cpu(mlock_pvec.vec, cpu); - if (pagevec_count(pvec)) - mlock_pagevec(pvec); + fbatch = &per_cpu(mlock_fbatch.fbatch, cpu); + if (folio_batch_count(fbatch)) + mlock_folio_batch(fbatch); } bool need_mlock_page_drain(int cpu) { - return pagevec_count(&per_cpu(mlock_pvec.vec, cpu)); + return folio_batch_count(&per_cpu(mlock_fbatch.fbatch, cpu)); } /** @@ -242,10 +242,10 @@ bool need_mlock_page_drain(int cpu) */ void mlock_folio(struct folio *folio) { - struct pagevec *pvec; + struct folio_batch *fbatch; - local_lock(&mlock_pvec.lock); - pvec = this_cpu_ptr(&mlock_pvec.vec); + local_lock(&mlock_fbatch.lock); + fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&mlock_fbatch.fbatch); if (!folio_test_set_mlocked(folio)) { int nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio); @@ -255,10 +255,10 @@ void mlock_folio(struct folio *folio) } folio_get(folio); - if (!pagevec_add(pvec, mlock_lru(&folio->page)) || + if (!folio_batch_add(fbatch, mlock_lru(folio)) || folio_test_large(folio) || lru_cache_disabled()) - mlock_pagevec(pvec); - local_unlock(&mlock_pvec.lock); + mlock_folio_batch(fbatch); + local_unlock(&mlock_fbatch.lock); } /** @@ -267,20 +267,22 @@ void mlock_folio(struct folio *folio) */ void mlock_new_page(struct page *page) { - struct pagevec *pvec; - int nr_pages = thp_nr_pages(page); + struct folio_batch *fbatch; + struct folio *folio = page_folio(page); + int nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio); - local_lock(&mlock_pvec.lock); - pvec = this_cpu_ptr(&mlock_pvec.vec); - SetPageMlocked(page); - mod_zone_page_state(page_zone(page), NR_MLOCK, nr_pages); + local_lock(&mlock_fbatch.lock); + fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&mlock_fbatch.fbatch); + folio_set_mlocked(folio); + + zone_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_MLOCK, nr_pages); __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGMLOCKED, nr_pages); - get_page(page); - if (!pagevec_add(pvec, mlock_new(page)) || - PageHead(page) || lru_cache_disabled()) - mlock_pagevec(pvec); - local_unlock(&mlock_pvec.lock); + folio_get(folio); + if (!folio_batch_add(fbatch, mlock_new(folio)) || + folio_test_large(folio) || lru_cache_disabled()) + mlock_folio_batch(fbatch); + local_unlock(&mlock_fbatch.lock); } /** @@ -289,20 +291,20 @@ void mlock_new_page(struct page *page) */ void munlock_page(struct page *page) { - struct pagevec *pvec; + struct folio_batch *fbatch; + struct folio *folio = page_folio(page); - local_lock(&mlock_pvec.lock); - pvec = this_cpu_ptr(&mlock_pvec.vec); + local_lock(&mlock_fbatch.lock); + fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&mlock_fbatch.fbatch); /* - * TestClearPageMlocked(page) must be left to __munlock_page(), - * which will check whether the page is multiply mlocked. + * folio_test_clear_mlocked(folio) must be left to __munlock_folio(), + * which will check whether the folio is multiply mlocked. */ - - get_page(page); - if (!pagevec_add(pvec, page) || - PageHead(page) || lru_cache_disabled()) - mlock_pagevec(pvec); - local_unlock(&mlock_pvec.lock); + folio_get(folio); + if (!folio_batch_add(fbatch, folio) || + folio_test_large(folio) || lru_cache_disabled()) + mlock_folio_batch(fbatch); + local_unlock(&mlock_fbatch.lock); } static int mlock_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,