Received: by 2002:ac0:a594:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m20-v6csp786694imm; Fri, 11 May 2018 06:27:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZrBUGG3jFD4Aluaq7ieTXmHZiIZ4kbaAuqnkwmJb0MAp2OYV4r+E+sQJESKyXoPsVMSRaSY X-Received: by 2002:a65:56cb:: with SMTP id w11-v6mr508680pgs.175.1526045230294; Fri, 11 May 2018 06:27:10 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1526045230; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=n9Ifpqx9NvjgsGeiyw+66goN7hdFp9+J1kxSMd8nxYN4oBL1ssfFovJVbcgcm5nRJ4 s+PuYCF1BMZF4E+iyd4urms7VxTXYrsVNAaPrAsbZ3NMHsJ/zFmX4E+u/EOugx5tFNNi wd1J9ZaBaqDiP7253IDjqmwYhiCaeDoBeF03yGr8jhIzp4B+fGeMbL6bJ/L98Iw3MOt2 OBNQ5T0Vhg2FvQPs5KWCbTmvyIs/45dMI43rxzCmjFxLQjYT/7UEsTvWfx9Q1Yxc8g3r qoeJHc8dp1dNJ5zA9gr4z0llru3CrQwQK9L3NX10etSASkjHq0/tQuFa+SoUqPcjSrCz zhAQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=SR3J+lQimZT/8KyS/zBkZpsSaxngPPZ7Yb0Bm2+CX7M=; b=MsKBrjI7rEhdgQc6DX9qD7iSjDYnttR7lgmWcK9URTorWsDRnlxr/DPLYT0P95nINE M0BkCRE/eyOXhji0ob3ZhiLX6pbF0xe7xWublxUs9M+Uu9yd+AyXg05HUmU1QGKjaG0R hjx5eXTSW8DSw4EZPGSHy08uI4FVBgt9CPamdfsleXv5Jv4tUatEuKsPHueDlNsTEDjy C1HHa3jhr7RKj70owxcnyeJLA61LPjTiGuAk+luAkw75AipOAaFDwpaMmFdv3jjV53P1 G8l3JPj1sYax66JCq3PQf2Zl0i28iCV4Yz0nVg0osJoGpRPEWh438MOOwA9paRjyBmeH IFcw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@infradead.org header.s=bombadil.20170209 header.b=VRUDmcqX; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id r144-v6si3412302pfr.286.2018.05.11.06.26.54; Fri, 11 May 2018 06:27:10 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=fail header.i=@infradead.org header.s=bombadil.20170209 header.b=VRUDmcqX; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753075AbeEKN0V (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 11 May 2018 09:26:21 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:39838 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752394AbeEKN0U (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 May 2018 09:26:20 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=SR3J+lQimZT/8KyS/zBkZpsSaxngPPZ7Yb0Bm2+CX7M=; b=VRUDmcqXt/asYJE96OrkTS6s2 zt4dgk3BwsQfwLfuATb1QiRDCpfpmSSUWfau+dEsbpvpRrMle4qLZd7/XJK9enWvLhnfI25j5kty5 NOm4ucDnH6/qHK8FeWyfmAkEi2whHTG6PuK5ZOx8V5kYjv5vgvt4ENBEwesNYT+1DZwLiMFLKvxXM MOH1fJljklxrb08cNDUWmpyAUcKbFHID8DpHv0vwgIrMxMbKXvyqE6/WFJLQL0TxJWqwWitkWk6xk +AHXwCFE7YukzrRqIl1ApagaXjYsi4GlYXuU9NzrLE7N0tY89Ulv2sbon34RIiJBAVJxcmidvrYUs t0uGW7mAA==; Received: from willy by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1fH83p-0000Qp-DT; Fri, 11 May 2018 13:26:13 +0000 Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 06:26:13 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Huaisheng HS1 Ye Cc: "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "mhocko@suse.com" , "vbabka@suse.cz" , "mgorman@techsingularity.net" , "alexander.levin@verizon.com" , "colyli@suse.de" , NingTing Cheng , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v1] include/linux/gfp.h: getting rid of GFP_ZONE_TABLE/BAD Message-ID: <20180511132613.GA30263@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <1525968625-40825-1-git-send-email-yehs1@lenovo.com> <20180510163023.GB30442@bombadil.infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 03:24:34AM +0000, Huaisheng HS1 Ye wrote: > > From: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org [mailto:owner-linux-mm@kvack.org] On Behalf Of Matthew > > Wilcox > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 12:10:25AM +0800, Huaisheng Ye wrote: > > > -#define __GFP_DMA ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_DMA) > > > -#define __GFP_HIGHMEM ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_HIGHMEM) > > > -#define __GFP_DMA32 ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_DMA32) > > > +#define __GFP_DMA ((__force gfp_t)OPT_ZONE_DMA ^ ZONE_NORMAL) > > > +#define __GFP_HIGHMEM ((__force gfp_t)ZONE_MOVABLE ^ ZONE_NORMAL) > > > +#define __GFP_DMA32 ((__force gfp_t)OPT_ZONE_DMA32 ^ ZONE_NORMAL) > > > > No, you've made gfp_zone even more complex than it already is. > > If you can't use OPT_ZONE_HIGHMEM here, then this is a waste of time. > > > Dear Matthew, > > The reason why I don't use OPT_ZONE_HIGHMEM for __GFP_HIGHMEM directly is that, for x86_64 platform there is no CONFIG_HIGHMEM, so OPT_ZONE_HIGHMEM shall always be equal to ZONE_NORMAL. Right. On 64-bit platforms, if somebody asks for HIGHMEM, they should get NORMAL pages. > For gfp_zone it is impossible to distinguish the meaning of lowest 3 bits in flags. How can gfp_zone to understand it comes from OPT_ZONE_HIGHMEM or ZONE_NORMAL? > And the most pained thing is that, if __GFP_HIGHMEM with movable flag enabled, it means that ZONE_MOVABLE shall be returned. > That is different from ZONE_DMA, ZONE_DMA32 and ZONE_NORMAL. The point of this exercise is to actually encode the zone number in the bottom bits of the GFP flags instead of something which has to be interpreted into a zone number. When somebody sets __GFP_MOVABLE, they should also be setting ZONE_MOVABLE: -#define __GFP_MOVABLE ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_MOVABLE) /* ZONE_MOVABLE allowed */ +#define __GFP_MOVABLE ((__force gfp_t)(___GFP_MOVABLE | (ZONE_MOVABLE ^ ZONE_NORMAL))) One thing that does need to change is: -#define GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE (GFP_HIGHUSER | __GFP_MOVABLE) +#define GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE (GFP_USER | __GFP_MOVABLE) otherwise we'll be OR'ing ZONE_MOVABLE and ZONE_HIGHMEM together. > I was thinking... > Whether it is possible to use other judgement condition to decide OPT_ZONE_HIGHMEM or ZONE_MOVABLE shall be returned from gfp_zone. > > Sincerely, > Huaisheng Ye > > > > > static inline enum zone_type gfp_zone(gfp_t flags) > > > { > > > enum zone_type z; > > > - int bit = (__force int) (flags & GFP_ZONEMASK); > > > + z = ((__force unsigned int)flags & ___GFP_ZONE_MASK) ^ ZONE_NORMAL; > > > + > > > + if (z > OPT_ZONE_HIGHMEM) > > > + z = OPT_ZONE_HIGHMEM + > > > + !!((__force unsigned int)flags & ___GFP_MOVABLE); > > > > > > - z = (GFP_ZONE_TABLE >> (bit * GFP_ZONES_SHIFT)) & > > > - ((1 << GFP_ZONES_SHIFT) - 1); > > > - VM_BUG_ON((GFP_ZONE_BAD >> bit) & 1); > > > + VM_BUG_ON(z > ZONE_MOVABLE); > > > return z; > > > } >