linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH 5/5] mm, page_alloc: Introduce ZONELIST_FALLBACK_SAME

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: <5A90DA2E42F8AE43BC4A093BF067884825785F1E@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Apr 2019 07:45:34 +0000
From:   "Du, Fan" <fan.du@...el.com>
To:     Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        "Wu, Fengguang" <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
CC:     "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Du, Fan" <fan.du@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 5/5] mm, page_alloc: Introduce
 ZONELIST_FALLBACK_SAME_TYPE fallback list



>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-linux-mm@...ck.org [mailto:owner-linux-mm@...ck.org] On
>Behalf Of Xishi Qiu
>Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 11:26 AM
>To: Wu, Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>; Du, Fan <fan.du@...el.com>
>Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org; Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>;
>Williams, Dan J <dan.j.williams@...el.com>; Hansen, Dave
><dave.hansen@...el.com>; Huang, Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>;
>linux-mm@...ck.org; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
>Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/5] mm, page_alloc: Introduce
>ZONELIST_FALLBACK_SAME_TYPE fallback list
>
>Hi Fan Du,
>
>I think we should change the print in mminit_verify_zonelist too.
>
>This patch changes the order of ZONELIST_FALLBACK, so the default numa
>policy can
>alloc DRAM first, then PMEM, right?

Yes, you are right. :)

>Thanks,
>Xishi Qiu
>>
>On system with heterogeneous memory, reasonable fall back lists wo
>ul be:
>>     a. No fall back, stick to current running node.
>>
>b. Fall back to other nodes of the same type or different type
>>        e.g. DRAM node 0 -> DRAM node 1 -> PMEM node 2 ->
>PMEM node 3
>>     c. Fall back to other nodes of the same type only.
>>        e.g. DRAM node 0 -> DRAM node 1
>>
>>
>a. is already in place, previous patch implement b. providing way to
>>
>satisfy memory request as best effort by default. And this patch of
>>
>writing build c. to fallback to the same node type when user specify
>>     GFP_SAME_NODE_TYPE only.
>>
>>     Signed-off-by: Fan Du <fan.du@...el.com>
>>     ---
>>      include/linux/gfp.h    |  7 +++++++
>>      include/linux/mmzone.h |  1 +
>>      mm/page_alloc.c        | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>      3 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
>>
>>     diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h
>>     index fdab7de..ca5fdfc 100644
>>     --- a/include/linux/gfp.h
>>     +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h
>>     @@ -44,6 +44,8 @@
>>      #else
>>      #define ___GFP_NOLOCKDEP 0
>>      #endif
>>     +#define ___GFP_SAME_NODE_TYPE 0x1000000u
>>     +
>>      /* If the above are modified, __GFP_BITS_SHIFT may need up
>dating */
>>
>>      /*
>>     @@ -215,6 +217,7 @@
>>
>>      /* Disable lockdep for GFP context tracking */
>>      #define __GFP_NOLOCKDEP ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
>>
>+#define __GFP_SAME_NODE_TYPE ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_SAME_NODE_T
>YPE)
>>
>>      /* Room for N __GFP_FOO bits */
>>      #define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT (23 + IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP))
>>     @@ -301,6 +304,8 @@
>>          __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | __GFP_NOWARN) & ~__GFP_RECLA
>IM)
>>      #define GFP_TRANSHUGE (GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT | __GFP_DIRE
>CT_RECLAIM)
>>
>>     +#define GFP_SAME_NODE_TYPE (__GFP_SAME_NODE_TYPE)
>>     +
>>      /* Convert GFP flags to their corresponding migrate type */
>>      #define GFP_MOVABLE_MASK (__GFP_RECLAIMABLE|__GFP_MOVA
>BLE)
>>      #define GFP_MOVABLE_SHIFT 3
>>     @@ -438,6 +443,8 @@ static inline int gfp_zonelist(gfp_t flags)
>>      #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
>>       if (unlikely(flags & __GFP_THISNODE))
>>        return ZONELIST_NOFALLBACK;
>>     + if (unlikely(flags & __GFP_SAME_NODE_TYPE))
>>     +  return ZONELIST_FALLBACK_SAME_TYPE;
>>      #endif
>>       return ZONELIST_FALLBACK;
>>      }
>>     diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
>>     index 8c37e1c..2f8603e 100644
>>     --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
>>     +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
>>
>@@ -583,6 +583,7 @@ static inline bool zone_intersects(struct zone
>*zone,
>>
>>      enum {
>>       ZONELIST_FALLBACK, /* zonelist with fallback */
>>
>+ ZONELIST_FALLBACK_SAME_TYPE, /* zonelist with fallback to the sam
>e type node */
>>      #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
>>       /*
>>        * The NUMA zonelists are doubled because we need zonel
>ists that
>>     diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>     index a408a91..de797921 100644
>>     --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>>     +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>
>@@ -5448,6 +5448,21 @@ static void build_zonelists_in_node_order(pg
>_data_t *pgdat, int *node_order,
>>       }
>>       zonerefs->zone = NULL;
>>       zonerefs->zone_idx = 0;
>>     +
>>
>+ zonerefs = pgdat->node_zonelists[ZONELIST_FALLBACK_SAME_TYPE]._zon
>erefs;
>>     +
>>     + for (i = 0; i < nr_nodes; i++) {
>>     +  int nr_zones;
>>     +
>>     +  pg_data_t *node = NODE_DATA(node_order[i]);
>>     +
>>     +  if (!is_node_same_type(node->node_id, pgdat->node_id))
>>     +   continue;
>>     +  nr_zones = build_zonerefs_node(node, zonerefs);
>>     +  zonerefs += nr_zones;
>>     + }
>>     + zonerefs->zone = NULL;
>>     + zonerefs->zone_idx = 0;
>>      }
>>
>>      /*
>>     --
>>     1.8.3.1
>>
>>