Received: by 2002:ac0:98c7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id g7-v6csp963911imd; Thu, 1 Nov 2018 08:14:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5dKL/DZI+5MwII6u0THsehHkeyQv/5Pv3xTOm4fiRCytzR3Ivo2gWWm58QNzTK68s7LZHM3 X-Received: by 2002:a63:e00d:: with SMTP id e13-v6mr7428582pgh.114.1541085258091; Thu, 01 Nov 2018 08:14:18 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1541085258; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=WZO84C+nv5XFbuafNZyZmDcesgCTn5+V2nHC4FmFnIL/vgEFNmo7yePyso9oVj/yop DXYDRVOLeYAhVNetzsxQcSANz/ySaA/fYnNhIE37JoOSgrLd0y0PROFKxQqkFc+Iykoq PSoiPv0I41yvnct3wbxK3hiWbP/f2q3hS5CG8p8j8rxj1UnF40fTNOXfFt7N607t/33l Ys9ib149nRDlMpRnFasnipBT8HhRTLFInEre3xSbIrzXdZc13gbUFcwHM4cE++Wfm2PO nR31CAM1pMFfM/juZ2vvtfHni6Eg1qzIcxZs7J0rAzPcjb1i70Wqgq0BpWle1FqXPl35 giFg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id; bh=hxoScH8/q1tBGKyNLRvMdGvdqpNy+QyRtHo1WYnAY0M=; b=Eg583AsOJLijJX66bdWxk8QW/4S7rb0ohUghLDwevMtc02025O+boavsjk7uu+DtAq 6BDvbhf32DU/E+UIZzfV2Qr4RuyE/pNCLnfMCwthwq1D5LFfuCtu7sI/eamA+aduzvlu vDDPKc0FOKjjjxGCxMValhoTsf5nUhnaro05XO7gLNpAYE5p/mB3K5xzRgA1T+x/GMcg 90Gk1bm8VD1zzj5jrL58K26gU6Nps41YDGRpbFRcR1LQZBZJMifn+eTMOGSPall37q5X ZYj7++9uTdtQk5q5TIBQOXNzQavqatNV1UZtWJeFPePLgBu9V7zfsqLvCK7KmrgQSRry w44A== 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=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h1-v6si23809749pld.332.2018.11.01.08.14.03; Thu, 01 Nov 2018 08:14:18 -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=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728743AbeKBAOX (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 1 Nov 2018 20:14:23 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:8884 "EHLO mga07.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728364AbeKBAOX (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Nov 2018 20:14:23 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Nov 2018 08:10:48 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,452,1534834800"; d="scan'208";a="246211859" Received: from ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com ([10.7.198.76]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Nov 2018 08:10:48 -0700 Message-ID: <5eb92a4b34a934459e8558d0f7695a89ee178f89.camel@linux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [mm PATCH v4 3/6] mm: Use memblock/zone specific iterator for handling deferred page init From: Alexander Duyck To: Mike Rapoport , Pasha Tatashin Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "mhocko@suse.com" , "dave.jiang@intel.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "willy@infradead.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "yi.z.zhang@linux.intel.com" , "khalid.aziz@oracle.com" , "rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "vbabka@suse.cz" , "sparclinux@vger.kernel.org" , "dan.j.williams@intel.com" , "ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "mgorman@techsingularity.net" , "mingo@kernel.org" , "kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com" Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2018 08:10:48 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20181101061733.GA8866@rapoport-lnx> References: <20181017235043.17213.92459.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20181017235419.17213.68425.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <5b937f29-a6e1-6622-b035-246229021d3e@microsoft.com> <20181101061733.GA8866@rapoport-lnx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-1.fc28) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2018-11-01 at 08:17 +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 03:40:02PM +0000, Pasha Tatashin wrote: > > > > > > On 10/17/18 7:54 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > > This patch introduces a new iterator for_each_free_mem_pfn_range_in_zone. > > > > > > This iterator will take care of making sure a given memory range provided > > > is in fact contained within a zone. It takes are of all the bounds checking > > > we were doing in deferred_grow_zone, and deferred_init_memmap. In addition > > > it should help to speed up the search a bit by iterating until the end of a > > > range is greater than the start of the zone pfn range, and will exit > > > completely if the start is beyond the end of the zone. > > > > > > This patch adds yet another iterator called > > > for_each_free_mem_range_in_zone_from and then uses it to support > > > initializing and freeing pages in groups no larger than MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES. > > > By doing this we can greatly improve the cache locality of the pages while > > > we do several loops over them in the init and freeing process. > > > > > > We are able to tighten the loops as a result since we only really need the > > > checks for first_init_pfn in our first iteration and after that we can > > > assume that all future values will be greater than this. So I have added a > > > function called deferred_init_mem_pfn_range_in_zone that primes the > > > iterators and if it fails we can just exit. > > > > > > On my x86_64 test system with 384GB of memory per node I saw a reduction in > > > initialization time from 1.85s to 1.38s as a result of this patch. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck > > > [ ... ] > > > > --- > > > include/linux/memblock.h | 58 +++++++++++++++ > > > mm/memblock.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++ > > > mm/page_alloc.c | 176 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > > > 3 files changed, 242 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h > > > index aee299a6aa76..2ddd1bafdd03 100644 > > > --- a/include/linux/memblock.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h > > > @@ -178,6 +178,25 @@ void __next_reserved_mem_region(u64 *idx, phys_addr_t *out_start, > > > p_start, p_end, p_nid)) > > > > > > /** > > > + * for_each_mem_range_from - iterate through memblock areas from type_a and not > > > + * included in type_b. Or just type_a if type_b is NULL. > > > + * @i: u64 used as loop variable > > > + * @type_a: ptr to memblock_type to iterate > > > + * @type_b: ptr to memblock_type which excludes from the iteration > > > + * @nid: node selector, %NUMA_NO_NODE for all nodes > > > + * @flags: pick from blocks based on memory attributes > > > + * @p_start: ptr to phys_addr_t for start address of the range, can be %NULL > > > + * @p_end: ptr to phys_addr_t for end address of the range, can be %NULL > > > + * @p_nid: ptr to int for nid of the range, can be %NULL > > > + */ > > > +#define for_each_mem_range_from(i, type_a, type_b, nid, flags, \ > > > + p_start, p_end, p_nid) \ > > > + for (i = 0, __next_mem_range(&i, nid, flags, type_a, type_b, \ > > > + p_start, p_end, p_nid); \ > > > + i != (u64)ULLONG_MAX; \ > > > + __next_mem_range(&i, nid, flags, type_a, type_b, \ > > > + p_start, p_end, p_nid)) > > > +/** > > > * for_each_mem_range_rev - reverse iterate through memblock areas from > > > * type_a and not included in type_b. Or just type_a if type_b is NULL. > > > * @i: u64 used as loop variable > > > @@ -248,6 +267,45 @@ void __next_mem_pfn_range(int *idx, int nid, unsigned long *out_start_pfn, > > > i >= 0; __next_mem_pfn_range(&i, nid, p_start, p_end, p_nid)) > > > #endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP */ > > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT > > Sorry for jumping late, but I've noticed this only now. > Do the new iterators have to be restricted by > CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT? They don't have to be. I just wrapped them since I figured it is better to just strip the code if it isn't going to be used rather then leave it floating around taking up space. Thanks. - Alex