linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mm: Defer ZONE_DEVICE page initialization to the point where we init pgmap

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]

Date:   Mon, 29 Oct 2018 18:45:49 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Pasha Tatashin <pavel.tatashin@...rosoft.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Zhang Yi <yi.z.zhang@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mm: Defer ZONE_DEVICE page initialization to the
 point where we init pgmap

On Mon 29-10-18 10:34:22, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:24 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon 29-10-18 10:01:28, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2018-10-29 at 17:35 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [..]
> > > > You are already doing per-page initialization so I fail to see a larger
> > > > unit to operate on.
> > >
> > > I have a patch that makes it so that we can work at a pageblock level
> > > since all of the variables with the exception of only the LRU and page
> > > address fields can be precomputed. Doing that is one of the ways I was
> > > able to reduce page init to 1/3 to 1/4 of the time it was taking
> > > otherwise in the case of deferred page init.
> >
> > You still have to call set_page_links for each page. But let's assume we
> > can do initialization per larger units. Nothing really prevent to hide
> > that into constructor as well.
> 
> A constructor / indirect function call makes sense when there are
> multiple sub-classes of object initialization, on the table I only see
> 3 cases: typical hotplug, base ZONE_DEVICE, ZONE_DEVICE + HMM. I think
> we can look to move the HMM special casing out of line, then we're
> down to 2. Even at 3 cases we're better off open-coding than a
> constructor for such a low number of sub-cases to handle. I do not
> foresee more cases arriving, so I struggle to see what the constructor
> buys us in terms of code readability / maintainability?

I haven't dreamed of ZONE_DEVICE and HMM few years back. But anyway,
let me note that I am not in love with callbacks. I find them to be a
useful abstraction. I can be convinced (by numbers) that special casing
inside the core hotplug code is really beneficial. But let's do that at
a single place.

All I am arguing against throughout this thread is the
memmap_init_zone_device and the whole code duplication just because zone
device need something special.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs