2024-01-24 18:09:38

by Uladzislau Rezki

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] mm: vmalloc: Improve description of vmap node layer

This patch adds extra explanation of recently added vmap
node layer based on community feedback. No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <[email protected]>
---
mm/vmalloc.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index 257981e37936..b8be601b056d 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -765,9 +765,10 @@ static struct rb_root free_vmap_area_root = RB_ROOT;
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct vmap_area *, ne_fit_preload_node);

/*
- * An effective vmap-node logic. Users make use of nodes instead
- * of a global heap. It allows to balance an access and mitigate
- * contention.
+ * This structure defines a single, solid model where a list and
+ * rb-tree are part of one entity protected by the lock. Nodes are
+ * sorted in ascending order, thus for O(1) access to left/right
+ * neighbors a list is used as well as for sequential traversal.
*/
struct rb_list {
struct rb_root root;
@@ -775,16 +776,23 @@ struct rb_list {
spinlock_t lock;
};

+/*
+ * A fast size storage contains VAs up to 1M size. A pool consists
+ * of linked between each other ready to go VAs of certain sizes.
+ * An index in the pool-array corresponds to number of pages + 1.
+ */
+#define MAX_VA_SIZE_PAGES 256
+
struct vmap_pool {
struct list_head head;
unsigned long len;
};

/*
- * A fast size storage contains VAs up to 1M size.
+ * An effective vmap-node logic. Users make use of nodes instead
+ * of a global heap. It allows to balance an access and mitigate
+ * contention.
*/
-#define MAX_VA_SIZE_PAGES 256
-
static struct vmap_node {
/* Simple size segregated storage. */
struct vmap_pool pool[MAX_VA_SIZE_PAGES];
@@ -803,6 +811,11 @@ static struct vmap_node {
unsigned long nr_purged;
} single;

+/*
+ * Initial setup consists of one single node, i.e. a balancing
+ * is fully disabled. Later on, after vmap is initialized these
+ * parameters are updated based on a system capacity.
+ */
static struct vmap_node *vmap_nodes = &single;
static __read_mostly unsigned int nr_vmap_nodes = 1;
static __read_mostly unsigned int vmap_zone_size = 1;
@@ -2048,7 +2061,12 @@ decay_va_pool_node(struct vmap_node *vn, bool full_decay)
}
}

- /* Attach the pool back if it has been partly decayed. */
+ /*
+ * Attach the pool back if it has been partly decayed.
+ * Please note, it is supposed that nobody(other contexts)
+ * can populate the pool therefore a simple list replace
+ * operation takes place here.
+ */
if (!full_decay && !list_empty(&tmp_list)) {
spin_lock(&vn->pool_lock);
list_replace_init(&tmp_list, &vn->pool[i].head);
@@ -2257,16 +2275,14 @@ struct vmap_area *find_vmap_area(unsigned long addr)
* An addr_to_node_id(addr) converts an address to a node index
* where a VA is located. If VA spans several zones and passed
* addr is not the same as va->va_start, what is not common, we
- * may need to scan an extra nodes. See an example:
+ * may need to scan extra nodes. See an example:
*
- * <--va-->
+ * <----va---->
* -|-----|-----|-----|-----|-
* 1 2 0 1
*
- * VA resides in node 1 whereas it spans 1 and 2. If passed
- * addr is within a second node we should do extra work. We
- * should mention that it is rare and is a corner case from
- * the other hand it has to be covered.
+ * VA resides in node 1 whereas it spans 1, 2 an 0. If passed
+ * addr is within 2 or 0 nodes we should do extra work.
*/
i = j = addr_to_node_id(addr);
do {
@@ -2289,6 +2305,9 @@ static struct vmap_area *find_unlink_vmap_area(unsigned long addr)
struct vmap_area *va;
int i, j;

+ /*
+ * Check the comment in the find_vmap_area() about the loop.
+ */
i = j = addr_to_node_id(addr);
do {
vn = &vmap_nodes[i];
@@ -4882,7 +4901,20 @@ static void vmap_init_nodes(void)
int i, n;

#if BITS_PER_LONG == 64
- /* A high threshold of max nodes is fixed and bound to 128. */
+ /*
+ * A high threshold of max nodes is fixed and bound to 128,
+ * thus a scale factor is 1 for systems where number of cores
+ * are less or equal to specified threshold.
+ *
+ * As for NUMA-aware notes. For bigger systems, for example
+ * NUMA with multi-sockets, where we can end-up with thousands
+ * of cores in total, a "sub-numa-clustering" should be added.
+ *
+ * In this case a NUMA domain is considered as a single entity
+ * with dedicated sub-nodes in it which describe one group or
+ * set of cores. Therefore a per-domain purging is supposed to
+ * be added as well as a per-domain balancing.
+ */
n = clamp_t(unsigned int, num_possible_cpus(), 1, 128);

if (n > 1) {
--
2.39.2



2024-01-24 18:09:41

by Uladzislau Rezki

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] mm: vmalloc: Refactor vmalloc_dump_obj() function

This patch tends to simplify the function in question,
by removing an extra stack "objp" variable, returning
back to an early exit approach if spin_trylock() fails
or VA was not found.

Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <[email protected]>
---
mm/vmalloc.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index b8be601b056d..449f45b0e474 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -4696,34 +4696,35 @@ void pcpu_free_vm_areas(struct vm_struct **vms, int nr_vms)
#ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK
bool vmalloc_dump_obj(void *object)
{
- void *objp = (void *)PAGE_ALIGN((unsigned long)object);
const void *caller;
+ struct vm_struct *vm;
struct vmap_area *va;
struct vmap_node *vn;
unsigned long addr;
unsigned int nr_pages;
- bool success = false;
-
- vn = addr_to_node((unsigned long)objp);

- if (spin_trylock(&vn->busy.lock)) {
- va = __find_vmap_area((unsigned long)objp, &vn->busy.root);
+ addr = PAGE_ALIGN((unsigned long) object);
+ vn = addr_to_node(addr);

- if (va && va->vm) {
- addr = (unsigned long)va->vm->addr;
- caller = va->vm->caller;
- nr_pages = va->vm->nr_pages;
- success = true;
- }
+ if (!spin_trylock(&vn->busy.lock))
+ return false;

+ va = __find_vmap_area(addr, &vn->busy.root);
+ if (!va || !va->vm) {
spin_unlock(&vn->busy.lock);
+ return false;
}

- if (success)
- pr_cont(" %u-page vmalloc region starting at %#lx allocated at %pS\n",
- nr_pages, addr, caller);
+ vm = va->vm;
+ addr = (unsigned long) vm->addr;
+ caller = vm->caller;
+ nr_pages = vm->nr_pages;
+ spin_unlock(&vn->busy.lock);

- return success;
+ pr_cont(" %u-page vmalloc region starting at %#lx allocated at %pS\n",
+ nr_pages, addr, caller);
+
+ return true;
}
#endif

--
2.39.2


2024-01-30 18:44:56

by Lorenzo Stoakes

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: vmalloc: Improve description of vmap node layer

On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:09:19PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> This patch adds extra explanation of recently added vmap
> node layer based on community feedback. No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <[email protected]>
> ---
> mm/vmalloc.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> index 257981e37936..b8be601b056d 100644
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -765,9 +765,10 @@ static struct rb_root free_vmap_area_root = RB_ROOT;
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct vmap_area *, ne_fit_preload_node);
>
> /*
> - * An effective vmap-node logic. Users make use of nodes instead
> - * of a global heap. It allows to balance an access and mitigate
> - * contention.
> + * This structure defines a single, solid model where a list and
> + * rb-tree are part of one entity protected by the lock. Nodes are
> + * sorted in ascending order, thus for O(1) access to left/right
> + * neighbors a list is used as well as for sequential traversal.
> */
> struct rb_list {
> struct rb_root root;
> @@ -775,16 +776,23 @@ struct rb_list {
> spinlock_t lock;
> };
>
> +/*
> + * A fast size storage contains VAs up to 1M size. A pool consists
> + * of linked between each other ready to go VAs of certain sizes.
> + * An index in the pool-array corresponds to number of pages + 1.
> + */
> +#define MAX_VA_SIZE_PAGES 256
> +
> struct vmap_pool {
> struct list_head head;
> unsigned long len;
> };
>
> /*
> - * A fast size storage contains VAs up to 1M size.
> + * An effective vmap-node logic. Users make use of nodes instead
> + * of a global heap. It allows to balance an access and mitigate
> + * contention.
> */
> -#define MAX_VA_SIZE_PAGES 256
> -
> static struct vmap_node {
> /* Simple size segregated storage. */
> struct vmap_pool pool[MAX_VA_SIZE_PAGES];
> @@ -803,6 +811,11 @@ static struct vmap_node {
> unsigned long nr_purged;
> } single;
>
> +/*
> + * Initial setup consists of one single node, i.e. a balancing
> + * is fully disabled. Later on, after vmap is initialized these
> + * parameters are updated based on a system capacity.
> + */
> static struct vmap_node *vmap_nodes = &single;
> static __read_mostly unsigned int nr_vmap_nodes = 1;
> static __read_mostly unsigned int vmap_zone_size = 1;
> @@ -2048,7 +2061,12 @@ decay_va_pool_node(struct vmap_node *vn, bool full_decay)
> }
> }
>
> - /* Attach the pool back if it has been partly decayed. */
> + /*
> + * Attach the pool back if it has been partly decayed.
> + * Please note, it is supposed that nobody(other contexts)
> + * can populate the pool therefore a simple list replace
> + * operation takes place here.
> + */
> if (!full_decay && !list_empty(&tmp_list)) {
> spin_lock(&vn->pool_lock);
> list_replace_init(&tmp_list, &vn->pool[i].head);
> @@ -2257,16 +2275,14 @@ struct vmap_area *find_vmap_area(unsigned long addr)
> * An addr_to_node_id(addr) converts an address to a node index
> * where a VA is located. If VA spans several zones and passed
> * addr is not the same as va->va_start, what is not common, we
> - * may need to scan an extra nodes. See an example:
> + * may need to scan extra nodes. See an example:
> *
> - * <--va-->
> + * <----va---->
> * -|-----|-----|-----|-----|-
> * 1 2 0 1
> *
> - * VA resides in node 1 whereas it spans 1 and 2. If passed
> - * addr is within a second node we should do extra work. We
> - * should mention that it is rare and is a corner case from
> - * the other hand it has to be covered.
> + * VA resides in node 1 whereas it spans 1, 2 an 0. If passed
> + * addr is within 2 or 0 nodes we should do extra work.
> */
> i = j = addr_to_node_id(addr);
> do {
> @@ -2289,6 +2305,9 @@ static struct vmap_area *find_unlink_vmap_area(unsigned long addr)
> struct vmap_area *va;
> int i, j;
>
> + /*
> + * Check the comment in the find_vmap_area() about the loop.
> + */
> i = j = addr_to_node_id(addr);
> do {
> vn = &vmap_nodes[i];
> @@ -4882,7 +4901,20 @@ static void vmap_init_nodes(void)
> int i, n;
>
> #if BITS_PER_LONG == 64
> - /* A high threshold of max nodes is fixed and bound to 128. */
> + /*
> + * A high threshold of max nodes is fixed and bound to 128,
> + * thus a scale factor is 1 for systems where number of cores
> + * are less or equal to specified threshold.
> + *
> + * As for NUMA-aware notes. For bigger systems, for example
> + * NUMA with multi-sockets, where we can end-up with thousands
> + * of cores in total, a "sub-numa-clustering" should be added.
> + *
> + * In this case a NUMA domain is considered as a single entity
> + * with dedicated sub-nodes in it which describe one group or
> + * set of cores. Therefore a per-domain purging is supposed to
> + * be added as well as a per-domain balancing.
> + */
> n = clamp_t(unsigned int, num_possible_cpus(), 1, 128);
>
> if (n > 1) {
> --
> 2.39.2
>

Looks good to me (sorry for delay, busy with many things in life :)! Feel free to add:

Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <[email protected]>

2024-01-31 09:51:57

by Uladzislau Rezki

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: vmalloc: Refactor vmalloc_dump_obj() function

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 06:50:48PM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:09:20PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> > This patch tends to simplify the function in question,
> > by removing an extra stack "objp" variable, returning
> > back to an early exit approach if spin_trylock() fails
> > or VA was not found.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > mm/vmalloc.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++----------------
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > index b8be601b056d..449f45b0e474 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> > @@ -4696,34 +4696,35 @@ void pcpu_free_vm_areas(struct vm_struct **vms, int nr_vms)
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PRINTK
> > bool vmalloc_dump_obj(void *object)
> > {
> > - void *objp = (void *)PAGE_ALIGN((unsigned long)object);
> > const void *caller;
> > + struct vm_struct *vm;
> > struct vmap_area *va;
> > struct vmap_node *vn;
> > unsigned long addr;
> > unsigned int nr_pages;
> > - bool success = false;
> > -
> > - vn = addr_to_node((unsigned long)objp);
> >
> > - if (spin_trylock(&vn->busy.lock)) {
> > - va = __find_vmap_area((unsigned long)objp, &vn->busy.root);
> > + addr = PAGE_ALIGN((unsigned long) object);
> > + vn = addr_to_node(addr);
> >
> > - if (va && va->vm) {
> > - addr = (unsigned long)va->vm->addr;
> > - caller = va->vm->caller;
> > - nr_pages = va->vm->nr_pages;
> > - success = true;
> > - }
> > + if (!spin_trylock(&vn->busy.lock))
> > + return false;
> >
> > + va = __find_vmap_area(addr, &vn->busy.root);
> > + if (!va || !va->vm) {
> > spin_unlock(&vn->busy.lock);
> > + return false;
> > }
> >
> > - if (success)
> > - pr_cont(" %u-page vmalloc region starting at %#lx allocated at %pS\n",
> > - nr_pages, addr, caller);
> > + vm = va->vm;
> > + addr = (unsigned long) vm->addr;
>
> Hmm not so nice to reuse addr here for something different, might be nice
> to have separate obj_addr and vm_addr or something. But it's not critical!
>
> > + caller = vm->caller;
> > + nr_pages = vm->nr_pages;
> > + spin_unlock(&vn->busy.lock);
> >
> > - return success;
> > + pr_cont(" %u-page vmalloc region starting at %#lx allocated at %pS\n",
> > + nr_pages, addr, caller);
> > +
> > + return true;
> > }
> > #endif
> >
> > --
> > 2.39.2
> >
>
> Other than the nit, which I don't insist on, this is a big improvement so,
>
> Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <[email protected]>
>

Thanks!

--
Uladzislau Rezki