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;
Message-ID: <6501ea6b-5659-53ee-7ae0-7ad248844086@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 5 Aug 2022 07:53:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.11.0
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 02/14] mm: Add support for unaccepted memory
Content-Language: en-US
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@suse.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>, marcelo.cerri@canonical.com,
        tim.gardner@canonical.com, khalid.elmously@canonical.com,
        philip.cox@canonical.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
References: <20220614120231.48165-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20220614120231.48165-3-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <8cf143e7-2b62-1a1e-de84-e3dcc6c027a4@suse.cz>
 <cb9d3310-3bc0-8ecf-5e71-becce980235f@redhat.com>
 <f936b024-43e1-5390-e33f-ad7d355a2802@suse.cz>
 <e828b48f-dcd8-6404-fc30-6e1dd682252f@redhat.com>
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <e828b48f-dcd8-6404-fc30-6e1dd682252f@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 8/5/22 07:22, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> A list that sits besides the existing free_area, contains only >=pageblock
>> order sizes of unaccepted pages (no migratetype distinguished) and we tap
>> into it approximately before __rmqueue_fallback()? There would be some
>> trickery around releasing zone-lock for doing accept_memory(), but should be
>> manageable.
>>
> Just curious, do we have a microbenchmark that is able to reveal the
> impact of such code changes before we start worrying?

Nope.  I went looking to see if I could find any impact.  I think Kirill
did too.  Too bad that effort didn't make it into the changelog yet.

The merging check at least is just checking a field in a cache-hot
'struct page'.  The common case is probably three instructions:

	load to a register
	check the bit
	jump if not set

It adds a wee bit of icache pressure, but it's also the kind of thing
that should be a piece of cake for the branch predictors.

That dynamic check could easily be wrapped by a static branch.  But,
that first requires more code to go dig in the nooks and crannies of the
page allocator to make sure *ALL* pages are accepted.