search for: mmu_notifier_invalidate_rang

...ange = vhost_invalidate_range, > +}; > + > void vhost_dev_init(struct vhost_dev *dev, > struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs, int nvqs, int iov_limit) > { I also wonder here: when page is write protected then it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. E.g. mm/ksm.c calls mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. If I'm right vhost won't get notified when page is write-protected since you didn't install start/end notifiers. Note th...

...ange = vhost_invalidate_range, > +}; > + > void vhost_dev_init(struct vhost_dev *dev, > struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs, int nvqs, int iov_limit) > { I also wonder here: when page is write protected then it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. E.g. mm/ksm.c calls mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. If I'm right vhost won't get notified when page is write-protected since you didn't install start/end notifiers. Note th...

...*dev, > > > struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs, int nvqs, int iov_limit) > > > { > > > > I also wonder here: when page is write protected then > > it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. > > > > E.g. mm/ksm.c calls > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > If I'm right vhost won't get notified when page is write-protect...

...*dev, > > > struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs, int nvqs, int iov_limit) > > > { > > > > I also wonder here: when page is write protected then > > it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. > > > > E.g. mm/ksm.c calls > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > If I'm right vhost won't get notified when page is write-protect...

...t nvqs, int iov_limit) > > > > > { > > > > I also wonder here: when page is write protected then > > > > it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. > > > > > > > > E.g. mm/ksm.c calls > > > > > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > > > > > Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > > > > > If I'm r...

...t nvqs, int iov_limit) > > > > > { > > > > I also wonder here: when page is write protected then > > > > it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. > > > > > > > > E.g. mm/ksm.c calls > > > > > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > > > > > Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > > > > > If I'm r...

...t nvqs, int iov_limit) > > > > > { > > > > I also wonder here: when page is write protected then > > > > it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. > > > > > > > > E.g. mm/ksm.c calls > > > > > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > > > > > Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > > > > > If I'm r...

...; > void vhost_dev_init(struct vhost_dev *dev, > > struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs, int nvqs, int iov_limit) > > { > > I also wonder here: when page is write protected then > it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. > > E.g. mm/ksm.c calls > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > If I'm right vhost won't get notified when page is write-protected since you > didn't i...

...*dev, > > > struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs, int nvqs, int iov_limit) > > > { > > > > I also wonder here: when page is write protected then > > it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. > > > > E.g. mm/ksm.c calls > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > If I'm right vhost won't get notified when page is write-protect...

...*dev, > > > struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs, int nvqs, int iov_limit) > > > { > > > > I also wonder here: when page is write protected then > > it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. > > > > E.g. mm/ksm.c calls > > > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call > > mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. > > > > If I'm right vhost won't get notified when page is write-protect...

...gt;>> struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs, int nvqs, int iov_limit) >>>> { >>> I also wonder here: when page is write protected then >>> it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. >>> >>> E.g. mm/ksm.c calls >>> >>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and >>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. >>> >>> Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call >>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. >>> >>> If I'm right vhost won't get notified when page...

...s, int iov_limit) >>>>>> { >>>>> I also wonder here: when page is write protected then >>>>> it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. >>>>> >>>>> E.g. mm/ksm.c calls >>>>> >>>>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and >>>>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. >>>>> >>>>> Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call >>>>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. >>>>> >>>>> If I'...

...gt;>> struct vhost_virtqueue **vqs, int nvqs, int iov_limit) >>>> { >>> I also wonder here: when page is write protected then >>> it does not look like .invalidate_range is invoked. >>> >>> E.g. mm/ksm.c calls >>> >>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start and >>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_end but not mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. >>> >>> Similarly, rmap in page_mkclean_one will not call >>> mmu_notifier_invalidate_range. >>> >>> If I'm right vhost won't get notified when page...

...truct *vma, pmd_t *pmd, put_page(page); add_mm_counter(mm, mm_counter_file(page), -HPAGE_PMD_NR); return; - } else if (is_huge_zero_pmd(*pmd)) { + } else if (pmd_trans_huge(*pmd) && is_huge_zero_pmd(*pmd)) { /* * FIXME: Do we want to invalidate secondary mmu by calling * mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() see comments below inside @@ -2117,30 +2117,34 @@ static void __split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd, pte = pte_offset_map(&_pmd, addr); BUG_ON(!pte_none(*pte)); set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, entry); - atomic_inc(&page[i]._mapcount); - pte_unmap(pte); - } -...

...(page); > add_mm_counter(mm, mm_counter_file(page), -HPAGE_PMD_NR); > return; > - } else if (is_huge_zero_pmd(*pmd)) { > + } else if (pmd_trans_huge(*pmd) && is_huge_zero_pmd(*pmd)) { > /* > * FIXME: Do we want to invalidate secondary mmu by calling > * mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() see comments below inside > @@ -2117,30 +2117,34 @@ static void __split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd, > pte = pte_offset_map(&_pmd, addr); > BUG_ON(!pte_none(*pte)); > set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, entry); > - atomic_inc(&page[i]._mapcount);...

...truct *vma, pmd_t *pmd, put_page(page); add_mm_counter(mm, mm_counter_file(page), -HPAGE_PMD_NR); return; - } else if (is_huge_zero_pmd(*pmd)) { + } else if (pmd_trans_huge(*pmd) && is_huge_zero_pmd(*pmd)) { /* * FIXME: Do we want to invalidate secondary mmu by calling * mmu_notifier_invalidate_range() see comments below inside @@ -2117,30 +2117,34 @@ static void __split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd, pte = pte_offset_map(&_pmd, addr); BUG_ON(!pte_none(*pte)); set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, entry); - atomic_inc(&page[i]._mapcount); - pte_unmap(pte); - } -...

...ct *mm) -{ - return unlikely(mm->mmu_notifier_mm); -} +int mm_has_notifiers(struct mm_struct *mm); struct mmu_notifier *mmu_notifier_get_locked(const struct mmu_notifier_ops *ops, struct mm_struct *mm); @@ -477,10 +473,7 @@ static inline void mmu_notifier_invalidate_range(struct mm_struct *mm, __mmu_notifier_invalidate_range(mm, start, end); } -static inline void mmu_notifier_mm_init(struct mm_struct *mm) -{ - mm->mmu_notifier_mm = NULL; -} +void mmu_notifier_mm_init(struct mm_struct *mm); static inline void mmu_notifier_mm_destroy(st...

This series tries to access virtqueue metadata through kernel virtual address instead of copy_user() friends since they had too much overheads like checks, spec barriers or even hardware feature toggling. This is done through setup kernel address through vmap() and resigter MMU notifier for invalidation. Test shows about 24% improvement on TX PPS. TCP_STREAM doesn't see obvious improvement.

This series tries to access virtqueue metadata through kernel virtual address instead of copy_user() friends since they had too much overheads like checks, spec barriers or even hardware feature toggling. This is done through setup kernel address through vmap() and resigter MMU notifier for invalidation. Test shows about 24% improvement on TX PPS. TCP_STREAM doesn't see obvious improvement.

This series adds support for transparent huge page migration to migrate_vma_*() and adds nouveau SVM and HMM selftests as consumers. An earlier version was posted previously [1]. This version now supports splitting a THP midway in the migration process which led to a number of changes. The patches apply cleanly to the current linux-mm tree. Since there are a couple of patches in linux-mm from Dan