Received: by 2002:ac0:a582:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m2-v6csp350955imm; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 00:54:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV60dAaoJ6AkxQVgh438Veyk7y63bOJUDIey7yK50fqQfM4dmXU3mvDwCTyVn2fY72MF885Vg X-Received: by 2002:a62:38d0:: with SMTP id f199-v6mr25546417pfa.48.1539762840974; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 00:54:00 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1539762840; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=tpKT8CotW/3PZT7SK6DRnD5F9XbqBgjjU+P7kTzUDoXfitZsibGsnQhBdRhzQ3DQKf ijfsCeRg7odRvHTgTVywvrQ3ePwhlQJMNsKo6nNVCQquvI2epMTMvoYEkVa32wRtLf0y 9VazskiUqiLfyyXiH1k2M+osU9QDybX4F6+GOfM/ubBSOQSx6pysXujmpnaISuMNInVR Wcq7wEW4aNInIGEgVxSe3tc/I4OlpGVe2+XivIWG55bAto77ZDwpIySGWTYs3jImZ1ML WqFH/9m2/sF2WjGjM2CJxWRUuzb0/Ev+UXc/taenQKZLhdYUDx3caBiq27rrz4qrNeTL 8VQA== 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; bh=mYdMDVQqX1PbXZD370R2Db2boFx7y+eowEljuNQgLD8=; b=FyIguAgXPlhCWji1oEXacmvnLXCGpjQx8R5/zNE4OCnhb2W3WxQZIx7/DyQq+Um2ff CxMk7GAsYLExg7bVhXWF7oxKONb1FEbMWadMYB7RxDlrD6ZVThl2eBOU4wlfpCaAw/FR sOgPVAYnnitWOQs8bZ3M9uxHOsheHBc+qkrV0VN4opkcQ5ric5+NX5RXMR6wK74TwqkD VdGI/pUzhdMdlFNFgeXu5W1bmW69g4frx4H55VlkE2lCG7scPUHi02kGNT6jty7lNEvb Nha6iJz5EZCFJrHmE6NrnZRDzAq0YQGcHbTfeayHOBeHgaoIRU7HFoIpUDz6mv7opWa7 oJYA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; 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; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id m6-v6si17624634pfg.282.2018.10.17.00.53.45; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 00:54:00 -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; 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; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727440AbeJQPr0 (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 17 Oct 2018 11:47:26 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:38634 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726691AbeJQPr0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2018 11:47:26 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB9CB027; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 07:52:57 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 09:52:57 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Alexander Duyck Cc: Dan Williams , Linux MM , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-nvdimm , Pasha Tatashin , Dave Hansen , =?iso-8859-1?B?Suly9G1l?= Glisse , rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Ingo Molnar , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , yi.z.zhang@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mm: Defer ZONE_DEVICE page initialization to the point where we init pgmap Message-ID: <20181017075257.GF18839@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20181009170051.GA40606@tiger-server> <25092df0-b7b4-d456-8409-9c004cb6e422@linux.intel.com> <20181010095838.GG5873@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20181010172451.GK5873@dhcp22.suse.cz> <98c35e19-13b9-0913-87d9-b3f1ab738b61@linux.intel.com> <20181010185242.GP5873@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20181011085509.GS5873@dhcp22.suse.cz> <6f32f23c-c21c-9d42-7dda-a1d18613cd3c@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6f32f23c-c21c-9d42-7dda-a1d18613cd3c@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 11-10-18 10:38:39, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On 10/11/2018 1:55 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 10-10-18 20:52:42, Michal Hocko wrote: > > [...] > > > My recollection was that we do clear the reserved bit in > > > move_pfn_range_to_zone and we indeed do in __init_single_page. But then > > > we set the bit back right afterwards. This seems to be the case since > > > d0dc12e86b319 which reorganized the code. I have to study this some more > > > obviously. > > > > so my recollection was wrong and d0dc12e86b319 hasn't really changed > > much because __init_single_page wouldn't zero out the struct page for > > the hotplug contex. A comment in move_pfn_range_to_zone explains that we > > want the reserved bit because pfn walkers already do see the pfn range > > and the page is not fully associated with the zone until it is onlined. > > > > I am thinking that we might be overzealous here. With the full state > > initialized we shouldn't actually care. pfn_to_online_page should return > > NULL regardless of the reserved bit and normal pfn walkers shouldn't > > touch pages they do not recognize and a plain page with ref. count 1 > > doesn't tell much to anybody. So I _suspect_ that we can simply drop the > > reserved bit setting here. > > So this has me a bit hesitant to want to just drop the bit entirely. If > nothing else I think I may wan to make that a patch onto itself so that if > we aren't going to set it we just drop it there. That way if it does cause > issues we can bisect it to that patch and pinpoint the cause. Yes a patch on its own make sense for bisectability. > > Regarding the post initialization required by devm_memremap_pages and > > potentially others. Can we update the altmap which is already a way how > > to get alternative struct pages by a constructor which we could call > > from memmap_init_zone and do the post initialization? This would reduce > > the additional loop in the caller while it would still fit the overall > > design of the altmap and the core hotplug doesn't have to know anything > > about DAX or whatever needs a special treatment. > > > > Does that make any sense? > > I think the only thing that is currently using the altmap is the ZONE_DEVICE > memory init. Specifically I think it is only really used by the > devm_memremap_pages version of things, and then only under certain > circumstances. Also the HMM driver doesn't pass an altmap. What we would > really need is a non-ZONE_DEVICE users of the altmap to really justify > sticking with that as the preferred argument to pass. I am not aware of any upstream HMM user so I am not sure what are the expectations there. But I thought that ZONE_DEVICE users use altmap. If that is not generally true then we certainly have to think about a better interface. > For those two functions it currently makes much more sense to pass the > dev_pagemap pointer and then reference the altmap from there. Otherwise we > are likely starting to look at something that would be more of a dirty hack > where we are passing a unused altmap in order to get to the dev_pagemap so > that we could populate the page. If dev_pagemap is a general abstraction then I agree. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs