Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:1287:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d7csp153294pxv; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 01:01:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzU7v/VbrwRk5wj0FPOS36ZMEraCrEp1uiKbbsFTWzYQ0novCLRAZ/uSlWTflTTkU72x52J X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:846e:: with SMTP id hx14mr4062335ejc.224.1626336084292; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 01:01:24 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1626336084; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=o1lqClWC4NaTQz3Ye6nT4UmLmpF4V5+n4CDrBZQHhPiFdP5OlL4nXn7CFEVEPHiDQW 4/nit9Rv4zkeFRpts+QXP/orRM76yBKmBWFtzMg8Rq7YfVf3SP557/PkJlMCBYKKTUqA 50kGWZxfqeR9NVg9a/63q+oDC3mr/Sfw922xjhEKwQRQkjay72tXQ+vSjo4F0d6MGGPq MohiKcQR2IStWLUwvdN9QBeDWZeRQSdo4j28oKnMgxasuXbwthino+X2DLLJuM4GRdqe rnkTu+iRgxECvka2CbuDgPWXcIPNwCa/AvfdTXYc4N+dC7U82y1rE9CgHy1vKAKLgwkV 9NjQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=RmmtyXsZhDe7d8DVsKhZ73M6TVlKftJMgXK/BUJmTco=; b=TwHAoKiIsR5pzuxz+GGNGFos/8DcQGDeSeO/mB3g9LR4cdimBfB8aAnPmPE37QbLLx 1uiK2i/08vn0xi3s+hkuRAy4HpPJPDlRZcxvn7gq+0lXmyYubKdsUpSFkDopaUJqSztz b/mtQvHxQbWODf8bL4ymQ7bTxjHx8Uy5Cqj2dBe6BzPQiI6zrHOmD3rT8BfKZKqmeNP7 rZwEUp+LZEbOQSkzmEolvSqnbV9nbZhpY6VA26rjTvgt17RBMW8xVLDnC+nFpQhnGy1m n0dUHHTjxghQ6r3yI28OMjqlBi2X6jdHtZafMcC8DAO14N6ARnLyrEgQb7BncL6zNple yJHw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=iXEULQyi; 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=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x4si6654531edq.317.2021.07.15.01.01.00; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 01:01:24 -0700 (PDT) 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; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=iXEULQyi; 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=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240104AbhGOGN3 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 15 Jul 2021 02:13:29 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:52500 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230495AbhGOGN3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jul 2021 02:13:29 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3217F61358; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 06:10:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1626329436; bh=NF9HPSYFdmTGIZ7fJoMVjM5ZOLU0Fy555wIvMVupgQA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=iXEULQyincIujtOinmEdo6s01AtI0/sRUdGrHO0Q2+2xhfXojuWVRKR0B4YA2d5/2 RnZG/eA+pCFAYmfpGCmbBGtLeCMbg+/baYDPHYcT8R5klvPpS1bvCEGB6krq50d5h/ Wkehc54w49Ixn0ES0fnV1TrIPaGNB7OE1mihlrwkhXd1VDhDVS6kiBmu8n6oU5YWWi aIm2yadS6dtuBT3KubOttjrxjO1ojaus3djtONyleS0j4Q4zTMRvhGE7xyB/fifJQi 9LK/qRHu0szhRY4GJfoRp81YLWXH751o2pS3XJACokdNNKmwRLc/msSXwY/blPyDdt 4Vls+y0KR0a+Q== Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 09:10:30 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Andrew Morton Cc: Michal Simek , Mike Rapoport , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm: introduce memmap_alloc() to unify memory map allocation Message-ID: References: <20210714123739.16493-1-rppt@kernel.org> <20210714123739.16493-4-rppt@kernel.org> <20210714153208.ef96cfc7c6bac360598101ed@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210714153208.ef96cfc7c6bac360598101ed@linux-foundation.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 03:32:08PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 15:37:38 +0300 Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > From: Mike Rapoport > > > > There are several places that allocate memory for the memory map: > > alloc_node_mem_map() for FLATMEM, sparse_buffer_init() and > > __populate_section_memmap() for SPARSEMEM. > > > > The memory allocated in the FLATMEM case is zeroed and it is never > > poisoned, regardless of CONFIG_PAGE_POISON setting. > > > > The memory allocated in the SPARSEMEM cases is not zeroed and it is > > implicitly poisoned inside memblock if CONFIG_PAGE_POISON is set. > > > > Introduce memmap_alloc() wrapper for memblock allocators that will be used > > for both FLATMEM and SPARSEMEM cases and will makei memory map zeroing and > > poisoning consistent for different memory models. > > > > ... > > > > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c > > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c > > @@ -6730,6 +6730,26 @@ static void __init memmap_init(void) > > init_unavailable_range(hole_pfn, end_pfn, zone_id, nid); > > } > > > > +void __init *memmap_alloc(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, > > + phys_addr_t min_addr, int nid, bool exact_nid) > > +{ > > + void *ptr; > > + > > + if (exact_nid) > > + ptr = memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw(size, align, min_addr, > > + MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE, > > + nid); > > + else > > + ptr = memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw(size, align, min_addr, > > + MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE, > > + nid); > > + > > + if (ptr && size > 0) > > + page_init_poison(ptr, size); > > + > > + return ptr; > > +} > > + > > static int zone_batchsize(struct zone *zone) > > { > > #ifdef CONFIG_MMU > > @@ -7501,8 +7521,8 @@ static void __ref alloc_node_mem_map(struct pglist_data *pgdat) > > end = pgdat_end_pfn(pgdat); > > end = ALIGN(end, MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES); > > size = (end - start) * sizeof(struct page); > > - map = memblock_alloc_node(size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, > > - pgdat->node_id); > > + map = memmap_alloc(size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, MEMBLOCK_LOW_LIMIT, > > + pgdat->node_id, false); > > Mostly offtopic, but... Why is alloc_node_mem_map() marked __ref? Once free_area_init_node() was __meminit, I stopped digging at that point. > afaict it can be __init? Yes. -- Sincerely yours, Mike.