[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <284eec3f-a79d-c5f0-3cd6-53b8e64100cd@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 15:04:57 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Cc: corbet@....net, mike.kravetz@...cle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mcgrof@...nel.org, keescook@...omium.org, yzaikin@...gle.com,
osalvador@...e.de, masahiroy@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
duanxiongchun@...edance.com, smuchun@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/4] mm: memory_hotplug: override memmap_on_memory
when hugetlb_free_vmemmap=on
On 12.05.22 14:50, Muchun Song wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 09:36:15AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 09.05.22 08:27, Muchun Song wrote:
>>> Optimizing HugeTLB vmemmap pages is not compatible with allocating memmap on
>>> hot added memory. If "hugetlb_free_vmemmap=on" and
>>> memory_hotplug.memmap_on_memory" are both passed on the kernel command line,
>>> optimizing hugetlb pages takes precedence.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>
> Because both two features are not compatible since hugetlb_free_vmemmap cannot
> optimize the vmemmap pages allocated from alternative allocator (when
> memory_hotplug.memmap_on_memory=1). So when the feature of hugetlb_free_vmemmap
> is introduced, I made hugetlb_free_vmemmap take precedence. BTW, I have a plan
> to remove this restriction, I'll post it out ASAP.
I was asking why vmemmap optimization should take precedence.
memmap_on_memory makes it more likely to succeed memory hotplug in
close-to-OOM situations -- which is IMHO more important than a vmemmap
optimization.
But anyhow, the proper approach should most probably be to simply not
mess with the vmemmap if we stumble over a vmemmap that's special due to
memmap_on_memory. I assume that's what you're talking about sending out.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists