Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:2785:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id ia5csp2004737pxb; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:19:53 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy/36Hyn855BEzDjILV3mZWmeGZ1MtgOZFz52fKSQmD6aGg9cXYoMeMbX3dMRg11wC42o08 X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:ae14:: with SMTP id le20mr9927959ejb.451.1610338793411; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:19:53 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1610338793; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=tlgWezqJqOYnAOJXOoKqb1LXqGPnLEMsKgxJewW4xl7TXtnD0cn4V8zvMVrmhF+Eeb OekBU6Ty0DQfAsla9gepC/d5glFqMOZKWZZ1tK2y9FEbqgbUyoUqq6QDGFmYYvpS9uH3 165hao4BhTj2/MS5Twzad7HS0/BgmhyJ+mPMe4ItEB/5vzNZUW0OJ6U3bjV0XimD/S7G pSowRd/5sgdmdTpF6h8oRUBTA6SyrCIuPXTyPrp785SWHuuJKSrFHUUy75n0fXXhMFsO 4q4nHCLGmDCufOOvQzxxff5bEYqPZz55X3lu3FDh4Uorphaw3FEH1CbGxTqNpZ+XEeZW ja1A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :to:subject; bh=vpzriW/RIC6kUF1rf7DiJrGLgPfXJ+KRR6dHnUrM/9E=; b=eVM98k6M2c3horxuFwbm8Y0WAGRnZHFA4+IJASarruZpgU1kpvNPBKm9AU5vo/UKzs 17IJic7TtbxsR1buvGbifouT8mBQBgxL6nylMmOrm22LWHEa9I5AJXg02MSgeXWHC+2w 2S0u7QH95mOVBhWaMjfK+4lHLHpiESkGYQNtPGWxTqvc3u1TqogQJfuP6tl87f3vfOOw xRbn+aQZXLSZc/5zF3MIDKUKQuoW3gNW4hUJCTjYEFNEvyu3EzNTuOuxdvmz8JUq7NjE irtWXCZ5ygwstK8S+k8St73KyYqb8hHLkyqYRrZY9mWu59mv3nDf/jKlCAT4k2phP6t8 aRyg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id dm18si6254812edb.422.2021.01.10.20.19.29; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:19:53 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726519AbhAKESY (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 10 Jan 2021 23:18:24 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:45420 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725824AbhAKESY (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Jan 2021 23:18:24 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F2B101E; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:17:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.163.88.153] (unknown [10.163.88.153]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6BD2F3F719; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:17:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] arm64: make section size configurable for memory hotplug To: David Hildenbrand , Sudarshan Rajagopalan , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <66f79b0c06602c22df4da8ff4a5c2b97c9275250.1609895500.git.sudaraja@codeaurora.org> <055b0aca-af60-12ad-cd68-e15440ade64b@arm.com> <3ae8c16d-50c4-c6cc-62b8-922cfc308c95@arm.com> <7939710a-5d03-de2b-73b2-bca472de431a@redhat.com> From: Anshuman Khandual Message-ID: <5138b97e-41f7-11c3-9a28-7fb2e2f5c387@arm.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 09:47:56 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7939710a-5d03-de2b-73b2-bca472de431a@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 1/8/21 9:00 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> To summarize, the section size bits for each base page size config >> should always >> >> a. Avoid (MAX_ORDER - 1 + PAGE_SHIFT) > SECTION_SIZE_BITS > > Pageblocks must also always fall completely into a section. > >> >> b. Provide minimum possible section size for a given base page config to >> have increased agility during memory hotplug operations and reduced >> vmemmap wastage for sections with holes. > > OTOH, making the section size too small (e.g., 16MB) creates way to many > memory block devices in /sys/devices/system/memory/, and might consume > too many page->flags bits in the !vmemmap case. > > For bigger setups, we might, similar to x86-64 (e.g., >= 64 GiB), > determine the memory_block_size_bytes() at runtime (spanning multiple > sections then), once it becomes relevant. > >> >> c. Allow 4K base page configs to have PMD based vmemmap mappings > > Agreed. > >> >> Because CONFIG_FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER is always defined on arm64 platform, >> the following would always avoid the condition (a) >> >> SECTION_SIZE_BITS (CONFIG_FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER - 1 + PAGE_SHIFT) >> >> - 22 (11 - 1 + 12) for 4K pages >> - 24 (11 - 1 + 14) for 16K pages without THP >> - 25 (12 - 1 + 14) for 16K pages with THP >> - 26 (11 - 1 + 16) for 64K pages without THP >> - 29 (14 - 1 + 16) for 64K pages with THP >> >> Apart from overriding 4K base page size config to have 27 as section size >> bits, should not all other values be okay here ? But then wondering what >> benefit 128MB (27 bits) section size for 16K config would have ? OR the >> objective here is to match 16K page size config with default x86-64. > > We don't want to have sections that are too small. We don't want to have > sections that are too big :) > > Not sure if we really want to allow setting e.g., a section size of 4 > MB. That's just going to hurt. IMHO, something in the range of 64..256 > MB is quite a good choice, where possible. > >> >>> >>> (If we worry about the number of section bits in page->flags, we could >>> glue it to vmemmap support where that does not matter) >> >> Could you please elaborate ? Could smaller section size bits numbers like >> 22 or 24 create problems in page->flags without changing other parameters >> like NR_CPUS or NODES_SHIFT ? A quick test with 64K base page without THP > > Yes, in the !vmemmap case, we have to store the section_nr in there. > IIRC, it's less of an issue with section sizes like 128 MB. > >> i.e 26 bits in section size, fails to boot. > > 26 bits would mean 64 MB, no? Not sure if that's possible even without > THP (MAX_ORDER - 1, pageblock_order ...) on 64k pages. I'd assume 512 MB > is the lowest we can go. I'd assume this would crash :) > >> >> As you have suggested, probably constant defaults (128MB for 4K/16K, 512MB >> for 64K) might be better than depending on the CONFIG_FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER, >> at least for now. > > That's also what I would prefer, keeping it simple. Okay sure, will send a RFC to begin with.