mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>,
	Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@sgi.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>,
	Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>,
	Daniel J Blueman <daniel@numascale-asia.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/4] Sparse initialization of struct page array.
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 06:15:49 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130723111549.GG3421@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130723110947.GF3421@sgi.com>

I think the other critical path which is affected is in expand().
There, we just call ensure_page_is_initialized() blindly which does
the check against the other page.  The below is a nearly zero addition.
Sorry for the confusion.  My morning coffee has not kicked in yet.

Robin

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:09:47AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:32:11AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 07/15/2013 11:26 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
> > >
> > > > Is there a fairly cheap way to determine definitively that the struct 
> > > > page is not initialized?
> > > 
> > > By definition I would assume no.  The only way I can think of would be 
> > > to unmap the memory associated with the struct page in the TLB and 
> > > initialize the struct pages at trap time.
> > 
> > But ... the only fastpath impact I can see of delayed initialization right 
> > now is this piece of logic in prep_new_page():
> > 
> > @@ -903,6 +964,10 @@ static int prep_new_page(struct page *page, int order, gfp_t gfp_flags)
> > 
> >         for (i = 0; i < (1 << order); i++) {
> >                 struct page *p = page + i;
> > +
> > +               if (PageUninitialized2Mib(p))
> > +                       expand_page_initialization(page);
> > +
> >                 if (unlikely(check_new_page(p)))
> >                         return 1;
> > 
> > That is where I think it can be made zero overhead in the 
> > already-initialized case, because page-flags are already used in 
> > check_new_page():
> 
> The problem I see here is that the page flags we need to check for the
> uninitialized flag are in the "other" page for the page aligned at the
> 2MiB virtual address, not the page currently being referenced.
> 
> Let me try a version of the patch where we set the PG_unintialized_2m
> flag on all pages, including the aligned pages and see what that does
> to performance.
> 
> Robin
> 
> > 
> > static inline int check_new_page(struct page *page)
> > {
> >         if (unlikely(page_mapcount(page) |
> >                 (page->mapping != NULL)  |
> >                 (atomic_read(&page->_count) != 0)  |
> >                 (page->flags & PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP) |
> >                 (mem_cgroup_bad_page_check(page)))) {
> >                 bad_page(page);
> >                 return 1;
> > 
> > see that PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP flag? That always gets checked for every 
> > struct page on allocation.
> > 
> > We can micro-optimize that low overhead to zero-overhead, by integrating 
> > the PageUninitialized2Mib() check into check_new_page(). This can be done 
> > by adding PG_uninitialized2mib to PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP and doing:
> > 
> > 
> > 	if (unlikely(page->flags & PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP)) {
> > 		if (PageUninitialized2Mib(p))
> > 			expand_page_initialization(page);
> > 		...
> > 	}
> > 
> >         if (unlikely(page_mapcount(page) |
> >                 (page->mapping != NULL)  |
> >                 (atomic_read(&page->_count) != 0)  |
> >                 (mem_cgroup_bad_page_check(page)))) {
> >                 bad_page(page);
> > 
> >                 return 1;
> > 
> > this will result in making it essentially zero-overhead, the 
> > expand_page_initialization() logic is now in a slowpath.
> > 
> > Am I missing anything here?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > 	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-23 11:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-12  2:03 [RFC 0/4] Transparent on-demand struct page initialization embedded in the buddy allocator Robin Holt
2013-07-12  2:03 ` [RFC 1/4] memblock: Introduce a for_each_reserved_mem_region iterator Robin Holt
2013-07-12  2:03 ` [RFC 2/4] Have __free_pages_memory() free in larger chunks Robin Holt
2013-07-12  7:45   ` Robin Holt
2013-07-13  3:08     ` Yinghai Lu
2013-07-16 13:02   ` Sam Ben
2013-07-23 15:32     ` Johannes Weiner
2013-07-12  2:03 ` [RFC 3/4] Seperate page initialization into a separate function Robin Holt
2013-07-13  3:06   ` Yinghai Lu
2013-07-15  3:19     ` Robin Holt
2013-07-12  2:03 ` [RFC 4/4] Sparse initialization of struct page array Robin Holt
2013-07-13  4:19   ` Yinghai Lu
2013-07-13  4:39     ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-07-13  5:31       ` Yinghai Lu
2013-07-13  5:38         ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-07-15 14:08         ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-07-15 17:45     ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-07-15 17:54       ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-07-15 18:26         ` Robin Holt
2013-07-15 18:29           ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-07-23  8:32             ` Ingo Molnar
2013-07-23 11:09               ` Robin Holt
2013-07-23 11:15                 ` Robin Holt [this message]
2013-07-23 11:41                   ` Robin Holt
2013-07-23 11:50                     ` Robin Holt
2013-07-16 10:26     ` Robin Holt
2013-07-25  2:25     ` Robin Holt
2013-07-25 12:50       ` Yinghai Lu
2013-07-25 13:42         ` Robin Holt
2013-07-25 13:52           ` Yinghai Lu
2013-07-15 21:30   ` Andrew Morton
2013-07-16 10:38     ` Robin Holt
2013-07-12  8:27 ` [RFC 0/4] Transparent on-demand struct page initialization embedded in the buddy allocator Ingo Molnar
2013-07-12  8:47   ` boot tracing Borislav Petkov
2013-07-12  8:53     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-07-15  1:38       ` Sam Ben
2013-07-23  8:18         ` Ingo Molnar
2013-07-12  9:19   ` [RFC 0/4] Transparent on-demand struct page initialization embedded in the buddy allocator Robert Richter
2013-07-15 15:16   ` Robin Holt
2013-07-16  8:55   ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-07-16  9:08     ` Borislav Petkov
2013-07-23  8:20       ` Ingo Molnar
2013-07-15 15:00 ` Robin Holt
2013-07-17  5:17 ` Sam Ben
2013-07-17  9:30   ` Robin Holt
2013-07-19 23:51     ` Yinghai Lu
2013-07-22  6:13       ` Robin Holt
2013-08-02 17:44 ` [RFC v2 0/5] " Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-02 17:44   ` [RFC v2 1/5] memblock: Introduce a for_each_reserved_mem_region iterator Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-02 17:44   ` [RFC v2 2/5] Have __free_pages_memory() free in larger chunks Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-02 17:44   ` [RFC v2 3/5] Move page initialization into a separate function Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-02 17:44   ` [RFC v2 4/5] Only set page reserved in the memblock region Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-03 20:04     ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-02 17:44   ` [RFC v2 5/5] Sparse initialization of struct page array Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-05  9:58   ` [RFC v2 0/5] Transparent on-demand struct page initialization embedded in the buddy allocator Ingo Molnar
2013-08-12 21:54   ` [RFC v3 " Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-12 21:54     ` [RFC v3 1/5] memblock: Introduce a for_each_reserved_mem_region iterator Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-12 21:54     ` [RFC v3 2/5] Have __free_pages_memory() free in larger chunks Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-12 21:54     ` [RFC v3 3/5] Move page initialization into a separate function Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-12 21:54     ` [RFC v3 4/5] Only set page reserved in the memblock region Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-12 21:54     ` [RFC v3 5/5] Sparse initialization of struct page array Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-13 10:58     ` [RFC v3 0/5] Transparent on-demand struct page initialization embedded in the buddy allocator Ingo Molnar
2013-08-13 17:09     ` Linus Torvalds
2013-08-13 17:23       ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-08-13 17:33       ` Mike Travis
2013-08-13 17:51         ` Linus Torvalds
2013-08-13 18:04           ` Mike Travis
2013-08-13 19:06             ` Mike Travis
2013-08-13 20:24               ` Yinghai Lu
2013-08-13 20:37                 ` Mike Travis
2013-08-13 21:35             ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-13 23:10           ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-13 23:55             ` Linus Torvalds
2013-08-14 11:27               ` Ingo Molnar
2013-08-14 11:05           ` Ingo Molnar
2013-08-14 22:15             ` Nathan Zimmer
2013-08-16 16:36     ` Dave Hansen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20130723111549.GG3421@sgi.com \
    --to=holt@sgi.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=daniel@numascale-asia.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=nzimmer@sgi.com \
    --cc=rob@landley.net \
    --cc=travis@sgi.com \
    --cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome