linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mm: condense scan

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHH2K0Z-rgqZU3wqZ2kuHKyZ4tmZK8RgTK-Keg0E-U+i4gDeqA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Jun 2018 13:52:08 -0700
From:   Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, willy@...radead.org
Cc:     Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: condense scan_control

On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:12 PM Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Use smaller scan_control fields for order, priority, and reclaim_idx.
> Convert fields from int => s8.  All easily fit within a byte:
> * allocation order range: 0..MAX_ORDER(64?)
> * priority range:         0..12(DEF_PRIORITY)
> * reclaim_idx range:      0..6(__MAX_NR_ZONES)
>
> Since commit 6538b8ea886e ("x86_64: expand kernel stack to 16K") x86_64
> stack overflows are not an issue.  But it's inefficient to use ints.
>
> Use s8 (signed byte) rather than u8 to allow for loops like:
>         do {
>                 ...
>         } while (--sc.priority >= 0);
>
> Add BUILD_BUG_ON to verify that s8 is capable of storing max values.
>
> This reduces sizeof(struct scan_control):
> * 96 => 80 bytes (x86_64)
> * 68 => 56 bytes (i386)
>
> scan_control structure field order is changed to utilize padding.
> After this patch there is 1 bit of scan_control padding.
>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
> Suggested-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>

Is there any interest in this?  Less stack usage could mean less
dcache and dtlb pressure.  But I understand if the complexity is
distasteful.

> ---
>  mm/vmscan.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 9b697323a88c..42731faea306 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -65,12 +65,6 @@ struct scan_control {
>         /* How many pages shrink_list() should reclaim */
>         unsigned long nr_to_reclaim;
>
> -       /* This context's GFP mask */
> -       gfp_t gfp_mask;
> -
> -       /* Allocation order */
> -       int order;
> -
>         /*
>          * Nodemask of nodes allowed by the caller. If NULL, all nodes
>          * are scanned.
> @@ -83,12 +77,6 @@ struct scan_control {
>          */
>         struct mem_cgroup *target_mem_cgroup;
>
> -       /* Scan (total_size >> priority) pages at once */
> -       int priority;
> -
> -       /* The highest zone to isolate pages for reclaim from */
> -       enum zone_type reclaim_idx;
> -
>         /* Writepage batching in laptop mode; RECLAIM_WRITE */
>         unsigned int may_writepage:1;
>
> @@ -111,6 +99,18 @@ struct scan_control {
>         /* One of the zones is ready for compaction */
>         unsigned int compaction_ready:1;
>
> +       /* Allocation order */
> +       s8 order;
> +
> +       /* Scan (total_size >> priority) pages at once */
> +       s8 priority;
> +
> +       /* The highest zone to isolate pages for reclaim from */
> +       s8 reclaim_idx;
> +
> +       /* This context's GFP mask */
> +       gfp_t gfp_mask;
> +
>         /* Incremented by the number of inactive pages that were scanned */
>         unsigned long nr_scanned;
>
> @@ -3047,6 +3047,14 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist, int order,
>                 .may_swap = 1,
>         };
>
> +       /*
> +        * scan_control uses s8 fields for order, priority, and reclaim_idx.
> +        * Confirm they are large enough for max values.
> +        */
> +       BUILD_BUG_ON(MAX_ORDER > S8_MAX);
> +       BUILD_BUG_ON(DEF_PRIORITY > S8_MAX);
> +       BUILD_BUG_ON(MAX_NR_ZONES > S8_MAX);
> +
>         /*
>          * Do not enter reclaim if fatal signal was delivered while throttled.
>          * 1 is returned so that the page allocator does not OOM kill at this
> --
> 2.17.0.921.gf22659ad46-goog
>