From 17156044b11c878a9fdd8326cf47bc0cbd1aa918 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Changbin Du Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 23:21:23 +0800 Subject: Documentation: x86: convert tlb.txt to reST This converts the plain text documentation to reStructuredText format and add it to Sphinx TOC tree. No essential content change. Signed-off-by: Changbin Du Reviewed-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet --- Documentation/x86/index.rst | 1 + Documentation/x86/tlb.rst | 83 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Documentation/x86/tlb.txt | 75 ---------------------------------------- 3 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-) create mode 100644 Documentation/x86/tlb.rst delete mode 100644 Documentation/x86/tlb.txt (limited to 'Documentation/x86') diff --git a/Documentation/x86/index.rst b/Documentation/x86/index.rst index e43aa9b31976..c4ea25350221 100644 --- a/Documentation/x86/index.rst +++ b/Documentation/x86/index.rst @@ -15,3 +15,4 @@ x86-specific Documentation entry_64 earlyprintk zero-page + tlb diff --git a/Documentation/x86/tlb.rst b/Documentation/x86/tlb.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..82ec58ae63a8 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/x86/tlb.rst @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +======= +The TLB +======= + +When the kernel unmaps or modified the attributes of a range of +memory, it has two choices: + + 1. Flush the entire TLB with a two-instruction sequence. This is + a quick operation, but it causes collateral damage: TLB entries + from areas other than the one we are trying to flush will be + destroyed and must be refilled later, at some cost. + 2. Use the invlpg instruction to invalidate a single page at a + time. This could potentially cost many more instructions, but + it is a much more precise operation, causing no collateral + damage to other TLB entries. + +Which method to do depends on a few things: + + 1. The size of the flush being performed. A flush of the entire + address space is obviously better performed by flushing the + entire TLB than doing 2^48/PAGE_SIZE individual flushes. + 2. The contents of the TLB. If the TLB is empty, then there will + be no collateral damage caused by doing the global flush, and + all of the individual flush will have ended up being wasted + work. + 3. The size of the TLB. The larger the TLB, the more collateral + damage we do with a full flush. So, the larger the TLB, the + more attractive an individual flush looks. Data and + instructions have separate TLBs, as do different page sizes. + 4. The microarchitecture. The TLB has become a multi-level + cache on modern CPUs, and the global flushes have become more + expensive relative to single-page flushes. + +There is obviously no way the kernel can know all these things, +especially the contents of the TLB during a given flush. The +sizes of the flush will vary greatly depending on the workload as +well. There is essentially no "right" point to choose. + +You may be doing too many individual invalidations if you see the +invlpg instruction (or instructions _near_ it) show up high in +profiles. If you believe that individual invalidations being +called too often, you can lower the tunable:: + + /sys/kernel/debug/x86/tlb_single_page_flush_ceiling + +This will cause us to do the global flush for more cases. +Lowering it to 0 will disable the use of the individual flushes. +Setting it to 1 is a very conservative setting and it should +never need to be 0 under normal circumstances. + +Despite the fact that a single individual flush on x86 is +guaranteed to flush a full 2MB [1]_, hugetlbfs always uses the full +flushes. THP is treated exactly the same as normal memory. + +You might see invlpg inside of flush_tlb_mm_range() show up in +profiles, or you can use the trace_tlb_flush() tracepoints. to +determine how long the flush operations are taking. + +Essentially, you are balancing the cycles you spend doing invlpg +with the cycles that you spend refilling the TLB later. + +You can measure how expensive TLB refills are by using +performance counters and 'perf stat', like this:: + + perf stat -e + cpu/event=0x8,umask=0x84,name=dtlb_load_misses_walk_duration/, + cpu/event=0x8,umask=0x82,name=dtlb_load_misses_walk_completed/, + cpu/event=0x49,umask=0x4,name=dtlb_store_misses_walk_duration/, + cpu/event=0x49,umask=0x2,name=dtlb_store_misses_walk_completed/, + cpu/event=0x85,umask=0x4,name=itlb_misses_walk_duration/, + cpu/event=0x85,umask=0x2,name=itlb_misses_walk_completed/ + +That works on an IvyBridge-era CPU (i5-3320M). Different CPUs +may have differently-named counters, but they should at least +be there in some form. You can use pmu-tools 'ocperf list' +(https://github.com/andikleen/pmu-tools) to find the right +counters for a given CPU. + +.. [1] A footnote in Intel's SDM "4.10.4.2 Recommended Invalidation" + says: "One execution of INVLPG is sufficient even for a page + with size greater than 4 KBytes." diff --git a/Documentation/x86/tlb.txt b/Documentation/x86/tlb.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 6a0607b99ed8..000000000000 --- a/Documentation/x86/tlb.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,75 +0,0 @@ -When the kernel unmaps or modified the attributes of a range of -memory, it has two choices: - 1. Flush the entire TLB with a two-instruction sequence. This is - a quick operation, but it causes collateral damage: TLB entries - from areas other than the one we are trying to flush will be - destroyed and must be refilled later, at some cost. - 2. Use the invlpg instruction to invalidate a single page at a - time. This could potentially cost many more instructions, but - it is a much more precise operation, causing no collateral - damage to other TLB entries. - -Which method to do depends on a few things: - 1. The size of the flush being performed. A flush of the entire - address space is obviously better performed by flushing the - entire TLB than doing 2^48/PAGE_SIZE individual flushes. - 2. The contents of the TLB. If the TLB is empty, then there will - be no collateral damage caused by doing the global flush, and - all of the individual flush will have ended up being wasted - work. - 3. The size of the TLB. The larger the TLB, the more collateral - damage we do with a full flush. So, the larger the TLB, the - more attractive an individual flush looks. Data and - instructions have separate TLBs, as do different page sizes. - 4. The microarchitecture. The TLB has become a multi-level - cache on modern CPUs, and the global flushes have become more - expensive relative to single-page flushes. - -There is obviously no way the kernel can know all these things, -especially the contents of the TLB during a given flush. The -sizes of the flush will vary greatly depending on the workload as -well. There is essentially no "right" point to choose. - -You may be doing too many individual invalidations if you see the -invlpg instruction (or instructions _near_ it) show up high in -profiles. If you believe that individual invalidations being -called too often, you can lower the tunable: - - /sys/kernel/debug/x86/tlb_single_page_flush_ceiling - -This will cause us to do the global flush for more cases. -Lowering it to 0 will disable the use of the individual flushes. -Setting it to 1 is a very conservative setting and it should -never need to be 0 under normal circumstances. - -Despite the fact that a single individual flush on x86 is -guaranteed to flush a full 2MB [1], hugetlbfs always uses the full -flushes. THP is treated exactly the same as normal memory. - -You might see invlpg inside of flush_tlb_mm_range() show up in -profiles, or you can use the trace_tlb_flush() tracepoints. to -determine how long the flush operations are taking. - -Essentially, you are balancing the cycles you spend doing invlpg -with the cycles that you spend refilling the TLB later. - -You can measure how expensive TLB refills are by using -performance counters and 'perf stat', like this: - -perf stat -e - cpu/event=0x8,umask=0x84,name=dtlb_load_misses_walk_duration/, - cpu/event=0x8,umask=0x82,name=dtlb_load_misses_walk_completed/, - cpu/event=0x49,umask=0x4,name=dtlb_store_misses_walk_duration/, - cpu/event=0x49,umask=0x2,name=dtlb_store_misses_walk_completed/, - cpu/event=0x85,umask=0x4,name=itlb_misses_walk_duration/, - cpu/event=0x85,umask=0x2,name=itlb_misses_walk_completed/ - -That works on an IvyBridge-era CPU (i5-3320M). Different CPUs -may have differently-named counters, but they should at least -be there in some form. You can use pmu-tools 'ocperf list' -(https://github.com/andikleen/pmu-tools) to find the right -counters for a given CPU. - -1. A footnote in Intel's SDM "4.10.4.2 Recommended Invalidation" - says: "One execution of INVLPG is sufficient even for a page - with size greater than 4 KBytes." -- cgit v1.2.3-55-g7522