Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:7420:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id hk32csp823889pxb; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 05:19:41 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxYFauDXstMxkBriMxXK5qfWC4mgtV3cPahcXvOus4u6yWopZyS7NmnmWtscgmDbJJ7f2jr X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:3e09:b0:6ce:d86c:91a3 with SMTP id k9-20020a1709063e0900b006ced86c91a3mr2244440eji.255.1645017581715; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 05:19:41 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1645017581; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=tGsS5/0bbq/cHDcqhV6h31Z9564RnmiKaoIHxANTjNFFN1pN1AEd/KupBaGP0t/PVK yj2gvVB3QX0jrFXcKbDjjWU7MXHp+kH1DMTrIzn3gSDddZnUi9GG/0On71lKd2sEuXgr Ci2jJTh0atkFReX15JyVXAPEdFkAVFdbX2KHogU1rOVmhZzl9vLIgaf4s6XsfO7Sbelz CzoK+R+RkeJYLZrGDq8PGPSpsnk71aLiK614TX/ZdqQWkumx0J4hcVVoyowsXYLGzI+w mCGYyIY6Lfaxwf6AJ3a7VqkQucIgNUP2wjtPHPR3brRTeKPZ95LX+YCJUSHArJtTpX1h RPgQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=Lb1bqsvvsYcjbpFtXfmNNbDt/PiDQIfqOvM+OSHfpu8=; b=omZxUACkI0LpGUtulXdocO793obklcRgF4V4j0On79cB8gQTbrUFZe9v6o7n+p2Nea jYTk+KYhNR31HywuBSJQtlBc3TeQpAOhzVrOYQlk2dT+qOc98HyoRp2pi7lEm913Db7u 1I3PmG/G6+OVvKigKvJTK74t9AgkmZC4nhhy4nKQeY4jGtMgkRPf2s63nx5X9P6tz4q2 4SWp23d0RwtD2j1OpJ7bLxOTiJPhp5stG6ERlo1j4ZZ4Di7N1e11/Hzhvt0zNQwoPVhV g3eS1fzxUPZs05M1C7Po3NcxlmKvTz/WwAGy0JPufM3dN+/m+03VyNdNXqfbQs+yO5mi jKhQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id ck5si1693032edb.0.2022.02.16.05.19.18; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 05:19:41 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233584AbiBPNGB (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 16 Feb 2022 08:06:01 -0500 Received: from mxb-00190b01.gslb.pphosted.com ([23.128.96.19]:47786 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231666AbiBPNGA (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Feb 2022 08:06:00 -0500 Received: from outbound-smtp04.blacknight.com (outbound-smtp04.blacknight.com [81.17.249.35]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7A9A261214 for ; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 05:05:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.blacknight.com (pemlinmail05.blacknight.ie [81.17.254.26]) by outbound-smtp04.blacknight.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E964BED69 for ; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 13:05:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: (qmail 28902 invoked from network); 16 Feb 2022 13:05:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO techsingularity.net) (mgorman@techsingularity.net@[84.203.17.223]) by 81.17.254.9 with ESMTPSA (AES256-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 16 Feb 2022 13:05:44 -0000 Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 13:05:43 +0000 From: Mel Gorman To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: Andrew Morton , Aaron Lu , Dave Hansen , Michal Hocko , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , LKML , Linux-MM Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm/page_alloc: Track range of active PCP lists during bulk free Message-ID: <20220216130542.GT3366@techsingularity.net> References: <20220215145111.27082-1-mgorman@techsingularity.net> <20220215145111.27082-3-mgorman@techsingularity.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 01:02:01PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 2/15/22 15:51, Mel Gorman wrote: > > free_pcppages_bulk() frees pages in a round-robin fashion. Originally, > > this was dealing only with migratetypes but storing high-order pages > > means that there can be many more empty lists that are uselessly > > checked. Track the minimum and maximum active pindex to reduce the > > search space. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman > > --- > > mm/page_alloc.c | 13 +++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c > > index 08de32cfd9bb..c5110fdeb115 100644 > > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c > > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c > > @@ -1450,6 +1450,8 @@ static void free_pcppages_bulk(struct zone *zone, int count, > > struct per_cpu_pages *pcp) > > { > > int pindex = 0; > > + int min_pindex = 0; > > + int max_pindex = NR_PCP_LISTS - 1; > > int batch_free = 0; > > int nr_freed = 0; > > unsigned int order; > > @@ -1478,10 +1480,17 @@ static void free_pcppages_bulk(struct zone *zone, int count, > > if (++pindex == NR_PCP_LISTS) > > Hmm, so in the very first iteration at this point pindex is already 1. This > looks odd even before the patch, as order 0 MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE list is only > processed after all the higher orders? > Yes and this was the behaviour before and after. I don't recall why. It might have been to preserve UNMOVABLE pages but after the series is finished, the reasoning is weak. I'll add a specific check. > > pindex = 0; > > Also shouldn't this wrap-around check also use min_index/max_index instead > of NR_PCP_LISTS and 0? > Yes, it should and it's a rebasing error from an earlier prototype that I missed. I'll fix it. > > list = &pcp->lists[pindex]; > > - } while (list_empty(list)); > > + if (!list_empty(list)) > > + break; > > + > > + if (pindex == max_pindex) > > + max_pindex--; > > + if (pindex == min_pindex) > > So with pindex 1 and min_pindex == 0 this will not trigger until > (eventually) the first pindex wrap around, which seems suboptimal. But I can > see the later patches change things substantially anyway so it may be moot... > It could potentially be more optimal but at the cost of complexity which I wanted to avoid in this path as much as possible. Initialising min_pindex == pindex could result in an infinite loop if the lower lists need to be cleared. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs