Re: [PATCH] mm: Always sanity check anon_vma first for per-vma locks

From: Matthew Wilcox
Date: Fri Apr 26 2024 - 10:01:05 EST


On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 04:14:16AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Suren, what would you think to this?
>
> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> index 6e2fe960473d..e495adcbe968 100644
> --- a/mm/memory.c
> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> @@ -5821,15 +5821,6 @@ struct vm_area_struct *lock_vma_under_rcu(struct mm_struct *mm,
> if (!vma_start_read(vma))
> goto inval;
>
> - /*
> - * find_mergeable_anon_vma uses adjacent vmas which are not locked.
> - * This check must happen after vma_start_read(); otherwise, a
> - * concurrent mremap() with MREMAP_DONTUNMAP could dissociate the VMA
> - * from its anon_vma.
> - */
> - if (unlikely(vma_is_anonymous(vma) && !vma->anon_vma))
> - goto inval_end_read;
> -
> /* Check since vm_start/vm_end might change before we lock the VMA */
> if (unlikely(address < vma->vm_start || address >= vma->vm_end))
> goto inval_end_read;
>
> That takes a few insns out of the page fault path (good!) at the cost
> of one extra trip around the fault handler for the first fault on an
> anon vma. It makes the file & anon paths more similar to each other
> (good!)
>
> We'd need some data to be sure it's really a win, but less code is
> always good.

Intel's 0day got back to me with data and it's ridiculously good.
Headline figure: over 3x throughput improvement with vm-scalability
https://lore.kernel.org/all/202404261055.c5e24608-oliver.sang@xxxxxxxxx/

I can't see why it's that good. It shouldn't be that good. I'm
seeing big numbers here:

4366 ± 2% +565.6% 29061 perf-stat.overall.cycles-between-cache-misses

and the code being deleted is only checking vma->vm_ops and
vma->anon_vma. Surely that cache line is referenced so frequently
during pagefault that deleting a reference here will make no difference
at all?

We've clearly got an inlining change. viz:

72.57 -72.6 0.00 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.exc_page_fault.asm_exc_page_fault.do_access
73.28 -72.6 0.70 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.asm_exc_page_fault.do_access
72.55 -72.5 0.00 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.do_user_addr_fault.exc_page_fault.asm_exc_page_fault.do_access
69.93 -69.9 0.00 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.lock_mm_and_find_vma.do_user_addr_fault.exc_page_fault.asm_exc_page_fault.do_access
69.12 -69.1 0.00 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.down_read_killable.lock_mm_and_find_vma.do_user_addr_fault.exc_page_fault.asm_exc_page_fault
68.78 -68.8 0.00 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.rwsem_down_read_slowpath.down_read_killable.lock_mm_and_find_vma.do_user_addr_fault.exc_page_fault
65.78 -65.8 0.00 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp._raw_spin_lock_irq.rwsem_down_read_slowpath.down_read_killable.lock_mm_and_find_vma.do_user_addr_fault
65.43 -65.4 0.00 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath._raw_spin_lock_irq.rwsem_down_read_slowpath.down_read_killable.lock_mm_and_find_vma

11.22 +86.5 97.68 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.down_write_killable.vm_mmap_pgoff.ksys_mmap_pgoff.do_syscall_64.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
11.14 +86.5 97.66 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.rwsem_down_write_slowpath.down_write_killable.vm_mmap_pgoff.ksys_mmap_pgoff.do_syscall_64
3.17 ± 2% +94.0 97.12 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.osq_lock.rwsem_optimistic_spin.rwsem_down_write_slowpath.down_write_killable.vm_mmap_pgoff
3.45 ± 2% +94.1 97.59 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.rwsem_optimistic_spin.rwsem_down_write_slowpath.down_write_killable.vm_mmap_pgoff.ksys_mmap_pgoff
0.00 +98.2 98.15 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.vm_mmap_pgoff.ksys_mmap_pgoff.do_syscall_64.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
0.00 +98.2 98.16 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.ksys_mmap_pgoff.do_syscall_64.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe

so maybe the compiler has been able to eliminate some loads from
contended cachelines?

703147 -87.6% 87147 ± 2% perf-stat.ps.context-switches
663.67 ± 5% +7551.9% 50783 vm-scalability.time.involuntary_context_switches
1.105e+08 -86.7% 14697764 ± 2% vm-scalability.time.voluntary_context_switches

indicates to me that we're taking the mmap rwsem far less often (those
would be accounted as voluntary context switches).

So maybe the cache miss reduction is a consequence of just running for
longer before being preempted.

I still don't understand why we have to take the mmap_sem less often.
Is there perhaps a VMA for which we have a NULL vm_ops, but don't set
an anon_vma on a page fault?