linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/7] mm: page_alloc: Use zone node IDs to approximate locality

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20131217223136.GI21724@cmpxchg.org>
Date:	Tue, 17 Dec 2013 17:31:36 -0500
From:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] mm: page_alloc: Use zone node IDs to approximate
 locality

On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 09:03:40PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 03:11:47PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 04:08:08PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 10:38:29AM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:13:52AM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 03:25:07PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 02:10:03PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > > > > > zone_local is using node_distance which is a more expensive call than
> > > > > > > necessary. On x86, it's another function call in the allocator fast path
> > > > > > > and increases cache footprint. This patch makes the assumption zones on a
> > > > > > > local node will share the same node ID. The necessary information should
> > > > > > > already be cache hot.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >  mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
> > > > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > > > > > index 64020eb..fd9677e 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > > > > > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > > > > > @@ -1816,7 +1816,7 @@ static void zlc_clear_zones_full(struct zonelist *zonelist)
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > > >  static bool zone_local(struct zone *local_zone, struct zone *zone)
> > > > > > >  {
> > > > > > > -	return node_distance(local_zone->node, zone->node) == LOCAL_DISTANCE;
> > > > > > > +	return zone_to_nid(zone) == numa_node_id();
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Why numa_node_id()?  We pass in the preferred zone as @local_zone:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Initially because I was thinking "local node" and numa_node_id() is a
> > > > > per-cpu variable that should be cheap to access and in some cases
> > > > > cache-hot as the top-level gfp API calls numa_node_id().
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thinking about it more though it still makes sense because the preferred
> > > > > zone is not necessarily local. If the allocation request requires ZONE_DMA32
> > > > > and the local node does not have that zone then preferred zone is on a
> > > > > remote node.
> > > > 
> > > > Don't we treat everything in relation to the preferred zone?
> > > 
> > > Usually yes, but this time we really care about whether the memory is
> > > local or remote. It makes sense to me as it is and struggle to see an
> > > advantage of expressing it in terms of the preferred zone. Minimally
> > > zone_local would need to be renamed if it could return true for a remote
> > > zone and I see no advantage in doing that.
> > 
> > What the function tests for is whether any given zone is close
> > enough/local to the given preferred zone such that we can allocate
> > from it without having to invoke zone_reclaim_mode.
> > 
> 
> Fine. The helper should then be renamed to zone_preferred_node because
> it's no longer about being local.

Fair enough!
--
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/