[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180725143007.25d5bff352872aba90ca731b@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:30:07 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>
Cc: Steven Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, jack@...e.cz, jglisse@...hat.com,
Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@...il.com>, bhe@...hat.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>, dave.hansen@...el.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, mingo@...nel.org,
osalvador@...hadventures.net, abdhalee@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
mpe@...erman.id.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: calculate deferred pages after skipping
mirrored memory
On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 21:46:25 -0400 Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com> wrote:
> > > +static inline bool defer_init(int nid, unsigned long pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
> > > {
> > > + static unsigned long prev_end_pfn, nr_initialised;
> >
> > So answer me quick, what happens with a static variable in an inlined
> > function? Is there one copy kernel-wide? One copy per invocation
> > site? One copy per compilation unit?
> >
> > Well I didn't know so I wrote a little test. One copy per compilation
> > unit (.o file), it appears.
> >
> > It's OK in this case because the function is in .c (and has only one
> > call site). But if someone moves it into a header and uses it from a
> > different .c file, they have problems.
> >
> > So it's dangerous, and poor practice. I'll make this non-static
> > __meminit.
>
> I agree, it should not be moved to header it is dangerous.
>
> But, on the other hand this is a hot-path. memmap_init_zone() might
> need to go through billions of struct pages early in boot, and I did
> not want us to waste time on function calls. With defer_init() this is
> not a problem, because if CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT is set
> memmap_init_zone() won't have much work to do, but for
> overlap_memmap_init() this is a problem, especially because I expect
> compiler to optimize the pfn dereference usage in inline function.
Well. The compiler will just go and inline defer_init() anwyay - it
has a single callsite and is in the same __meminint section as its
calling function. My gcc-7.2.0 does this. Marking it noninline
__meminit is basically syntactic fluff designed to encourage people to
think twice.
> >
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c~mm-calculate-deferred-pages-after-skipping-mirrored-memory-fix
> > +++ a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -309,7 +309,8 @@ static inline bool __meminit early_page_
> > * Returns true when the remaining initialisation should be deferred until
> > * later in the boot cycle when it can be parallelised.
> > */
> > -static inline bool defer_init(int nid, unsigned long pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
> > +static bool __meminit
> > +defer_init(int nid, unsigned long pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
> > {
> > static unsigned long prev_end_pfn, nr_initialised;
> >
> >
> > Also, what locking protects these statics? Our knowledge that this
> > code is single-threaded, presumably?
>
> Correct, this is called only from "context == MEMMAP_EARLY", way
> before smp_init().
Might be worth a little comment to put readers minds at ease.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists