[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49C3C321.8080508@vflare.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 21:54:01 +0530
From: Nitin Gupta <nitingupta910@...il.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] xvmalloc memory allocator
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Nitin Gupta wrote:
>
>> xvmalloc is a memory allocator designed specifically for compcache project.
>
> Its an allocator that is highmem capable? Looks like an entirely new
> animal to me.
>
>> * Features:
>> - Low metadata overhead (just 4 bytes per object)
>
> SLUB has 0 byte overhead. SLOB has 2 bytes.
SLUB: 0 metadata but lot of wastage due to rounding-off.
SLOB: 2 bytes header but I think we should really return object aligned to
at least 4 bytes on most archs (including x86 and x64). Apart from smaller
header, it has too many other problems as I detailed in previous mail.
>
>> - O(1) Alloc/Free - except when we have to call system page allocator to
>> get additional memory.
>
> SLOB is not O(1) okay but the others are.
Only SLOB is currently there for good packing, so it is the only one worth
comparing against. We loose this mem-compression game if we waste too much :)
>
>> - Very low fragmentation: In all tests, xvMalloc memory usage is within 12%
>> of "Ideal".
>
> Maybe try a fair test instead of relying on kmalloc rounding up to
> the next power of 2 size?
>
Okay, for testing, I will make some wrappers around SLOB that directly use
slob_alloc() to avoid any of this rounding-off. I hope to show some data on
this soon. But considering other SLOB issues, this should not, hopefully,
be a blocker for compcache.
>> One of the main highlights is that it maps pages only when required.
>> So, it does not hog vmalloc area which is very small on 32-bit systems.
>
> Got some difficulty understanding what is going on here. So this allocator
> is highmem capable? Doesnt that mean that you must make function calls to
> ensure that an object is mapped before accessing it.
>
Yes. xvmalloc caller gets <pagenum, offset> pair. Caller has to
separately map it to get dereferenceable pointer.
>> +#include "xvmalloc_int.h"
>> +
>> +static void stat_inc(u64 *value)
>> +{
>> + *value = *value + 1;
>> +}
>
> (*value) += 1?
>
Looks better.
> atomic_inc?
>
There is really no need to make these stat variables atomic.
> local_inc?
>
This one looks useful when we work on making compcache code scalable.
>> +static void bitmap_set(u32 *map, u32 idx)
>> +{
>> + *map |= (u32)(1 << idx);
>> +}
>
> We have bitops for that purpose. Please use those.
>
Ok.
>> +/*
>> + * Get index of free list having blocks of size greater than
>> + * or equal to requested size.
>> + */
>> +static u32 get_index(u32 size)
>> +{
>> + size = (size + FL_DELTA_MASK) & ~FL_DELTA_MASK;
>
> See the ALIGN macro.
>
ALIGN is doing same thing - will use it instead.
>> +/*
>> + * Allocate a memory page. Called when a pool needs to grow.
>> + */
>> +static u32 xv_alloc_page(void)
>> +{
>> + struct page *page;
>> +
>> + page = alloc_page(GFP_NOIO | __GFP_HIGHMEM);
>
> Yes a highmem based allocator!!!!
>
>> +
>> + if (unlikely(!page))
>> + return INVALID_PGNUM;
>
> Return NULL?
>
>> +#define INVALID_PGNUM ((u32)(-1))
>
> NULL
>
okay, INVALID_PGNUM -> NULL
>> +#define ROUNDUP(x, y) (((x) + (y) - 1) / (y) * (y))
>
> There is a global macro available for that purpose
>
Ok, will use that.
>> +/* Each individual bitmap is 32-bit */
>> +#define BITMAP_BITS 32
>
> Use kernel constants please BITS_PER_LONG here.
>
Ok.
>> +#define ROUNDUP_ALIGN(x) (((x) + XV_ALIGN_MASK) & ~XV_ALIGN_MASK)
>
> == ALIGN?
Yup.
>
> Well I think this allocator is pretty useful for systems that depend to a
> large degree on highmem. This is basically x86 32 bit configuration swith
> more than 1G memmory.
>
Not just highmem.
1) Its O(1) and as a side effect causes less cache pollution than SLOB which
does this absolutely crazy freelist scanning.
2) Better packing (will post comparison data soon).
I think, with a bit playing around with interfaces, it can be turned into
general purpose allocator (this will most probably lack highmem support).
Thanks for your feedback.
Nitin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists