[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e0fa88df-ff8b-f820-e255-92fbeecc37e6@windriver.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 10:51:46 +0800
From: "Xu, Yanfei" <yanfei.xu@...driver.com>
To: Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>
Cc: Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: khugepaged: check MMF_DISABLE_THP ahead of
iterating over vmas
On 4/6/21 2:20 AM, Yang Shi wrote:
> [Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address]
>
> On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 8:33 AM <yanfei.xu@...driver.com> wrote:
>>
>> From: Yanfei Xu <yanfei.xu@...driver.com>
>>
>> We could check MMF_DISABLE_THP ahead of iterating over all of vma.
>> Otherwise if some mm_struct contain a large number of vma, there will
>> be amounts meaningless cpu cycles cost.
>>
>> BTW, drop an unnecessary cond_resched(), because there is a another
>> cond_resched() followed it and no consumed invocation between them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yanfei Xu <yanfei.xu@...driver.com>
>> ---
>> mm/khugepaged.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/khugepaged.c b/mm/khugepaged.c
>> index 2efe1d0c92ed..c293ec4a94ea 100644
>> --- a/mm/khugepaged.c
>> +++ b/mm/khugepaged.c
>> @@ -2094,6 +2094,8 @@ static unsigned int khugepaged_scan_mm_slot(unsigned int pages,
>> */
>> if (unlikely(!mmap_read_trylock(mm)))
>> goto breakouterloop_mmap_lock;
>> + if (test_bit(MMF_DISABLE_THP, &mm->flags))
>> + goto breakouterloop_mmap_lock;
>
> It is fine to check this flag. But mmap_lock has been acquired so you
> should jump to breakouterloop.
Oops! It's my fault. Thank you for pointing out this.
Will fix it in v2.
>
>> if (likely(!khugepaged_test_exit(mm)))
>> vma = find_vma(mm, khugepaged_scan.address);
>>
>> @@ -2101,7 +2103,6 @@ static unsigned int khugepaged_scan_mm_slot(unsigned int pages,
>> for (; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
>> unsigned long hstart, hend;
>>
>> - cond_resched();
>
> I don't have a strong opinion for removing this cond_resched(). But
> IIUC khugepaged is a best effort job there is no harm to keep it IMHO.
>
Yes, keeping it is no harm. But I think we should add it when we need.
Look at the blow codes, there are only some simple check between these
two cond_resched(). And we still have some cond_resched() in the
khugepaged_scan_file() and khugepaged_scan_pmd() which is the actual
wrok about collapsing. So I think it is unnecessary. :)
for (; vma; vma = vma->vm_next) {
unsigned long hstart, hend;
cond_resched(); //here
if (unlikely(khugepaged_test_exit(mm))) {
progress++;
break;
}
if (!hugepage_vma_check(vma, vma->vm_flags)) {
skip:
progress++;
continue;
}
hstart = ALIGN(vma->vm_start, HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);
hend = ALIGN_DOWN(vma->vm_end, HPAGE_PMD_SIZE);
if (hstart >= hend)
goto skip;
if (khugepaged_scan.address > hend)
goto skip;
if (khugepaged_scan.address < hstart)
khugepaged_scan.address = hstart;
VM_BUG_ON(!IS_ALIGNED(khugepaged_scan.address,
HPAGE_PMD_SIZE));
if (shmem_file(vma->vm_file) && !shmem_huge_enabled(vma))
goto skip;
while (khugepaged_scan.address < hend) {
int ret;
cond_resched(); //here
>> if (unlikely(khugepaged_test_exit(mm))) {
>> progress++;
>> break;
>> --
>> 2.27.0
>>
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists