| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <87wn06j1eg.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 09:08:55 +0800
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, vbabka@...e.cz, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: compaction: skip memory hole rapidly when
isolating migratable pages
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> writes:
> On 13.06.23 13:13, Baolin Wang wrote:
>> On 6/13/2023 5:56 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 13.06.23 10:55, Baolin Wang wrote:
>>>> On some machines, the normal zone can have a large memory hole like
>>>> below memory layout, and we can see the range from 0x100000000 to
>>>> 0x1800000000 is a hole. So when isolating some migratable pages, the
>>>> scanner can meet the hole and it will take more time to skip the large
>>>> hole. From my measurement, I can see the isolation scanner will take
>>>> 80us ~ 100us to skip the large hole [0x100000000 - 0x1800000000].
>>>>
>>>> So adding a new helper to fast search next online memory section
>>>> to skip the large hole can help to find next suitable pageblock
>>>> efficiently. With this patch, I can see the large hole scanning only
>>>> takes < 1us.
>>>>
>>>> [ 0.000000] Zone ranges:
>>>> [ 0.000000] DMA [mem 0x0000000040000000-0x00000000ffffffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] DMA32 empty
>>>> [ 0.000000] Normal [mem 0x0000000100000000-0x0000001fa7ffffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] Movable zone start for each node
>>>> [ 0.000000] Early memory node ranges
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000000040000000-0x0000000fffffffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000001800000000-0x0000001fa3c7ffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000001fa3c80000-0x0000001fa3ffffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000001fa4000000-0x0000001fa402ffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000001fa4030000-0x0000001fa40effff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000001fa40f0000-0x0000001fa73cffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000001fa73d0000-0x0000001fa745ffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000001fa7460000-0x0000001fa746ffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000001fa7470000-0x0000001fa758ffff]
>>>> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000001fa7590000-0x0000001fa7ffffff]
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Changes from v1:
>>>> - Fix building errors if CONFIG_SPARSEMEM is not selected.
>>>> - Use NR_MEM_SECTIONS instead of '-1' per Huang Ying.
>>>> ---
>>>> include/linux/mmzone.h | 10 ++++++++++
>>>> mm/compaction.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>> 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
>>>> index 5a7ada0413da..5ff1fa2efe28 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
>>>> @@ -2000,6 +2000,16 @@ static inline unsigned long
>>>> next_present_section_nr(unsigned long section_nr)
>>>> return -1;
>>>> }
>>>> +static inline unsigned long next_online_section_nr(unsigned long
>>>> section_nr)
>>>> +{
>>>> + while (++section_nr <= __highest_present_section_nr) {
>>>> + if (online_section_nr(section_nr))
>>>> + return section_nr;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return NR_MEM_SECTIONS;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> /*
>>>> * These are _only_ used during initialisation, therefore they
>>>> * can use __initdata ... They could have names to indicate
>>>> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
>>>> index 3398ef3a55fe..c31ff6123891 100644
>>>> --- a/mm/compaction.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
>>>> @@ -229,6 +229,28 @@ static void reset_cached_positions(struct zone
>>>> *zone)
>>>> pageblock_start_pfn(zone_end_pfn(zone) - 1);
>>>> }
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
>>>> +static unsigned long skip_hole_pageblock(unsigned long start_pfn)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned long next_online_nr;
>>>> + unsigned long start_nr = pfn_to_section_nr(start_pfn);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (online_section_nr(start_nr))
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + next_online_nr = next_online_section_nr(start_nr);
>>>> + if (next_online_nr < NR_MEM_SECTIONS)
>>>> + return section_nr_to_pfn(next_online_nr);
>>>> +
>>>
>>> I would simply inline next_online_section_nr and simplify (and add a
>>> comment):
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * If the PFN falls into an offline section, return the start PFN of the
>>> * next online section. If the PFN falls into an online section or if
>>> * there is no next online section, return 0.
>>> */
>>> static unsigned long skip_hole_pageblock(unsigned long start_pfn)
>>> {
>>> unsigned long nr = pfn_to_section_nr(start_pfn);
>>>
>>> if (online_section_nr(nr))
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> while (++nr <= __highest_present_section_nr) {
>>> if (online_section_nr(nr))
>>> return section_nr_to_pfn(nr);
>>> }
>>> return 0
>>> }
>>>
>>> Easier, no?
>> Originally I want to add a common helper like
>> next_present_section_nr(),
>> which can be used by other users. But yes, your suggestion is easier,
>> and I am fine with that.
>>
>>> And maybe just call that function "skip_offline_sections()" then?
>>> Because we're not operating on pageblocks.
>> OK. Thanks.
>>
>
> Feel free to add to the simplified version
>
> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
With David's above comments addressed, feel free to add
Acked-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists