Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756551Ab2JWGeV (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2012 02:34:21 -0400 Received: from shutemov.name ([176.9.204.213]:59972 "EHLO shutemov.name" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753452Ab2JWGeU (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2012 02:34:20 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 09:35:32 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: Andrew Morton Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrea Arcangeli , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andi Kleen , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/10] thp: implement refcounting for huge zero page Message-ID: <20121023063532.GA15870@shutemov.name> References: <1350280859-18801-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <1350280859-18801-11-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20121018164502.b32791e7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20121018235941.GA32397@shutemov.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121018235941.GA32397@shutemov.name> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2315 Lines: 54 On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 02:59:41AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 04:45:02PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 09:00:59 +0300 > > "Kirill A. Shutemov" wrote: > > > > > H. Peter Anvin doesn't like huge zero page which sticks in memory forever > > > after the first allocation. Here's implementation of lockless refcounting > > > for huge zero page. > > > > > > We have two basic primitives: {get,put}_huge_zero_page(). They > > > manipulate reference counter. > > > > > > If counter is 0, get_huge_zero_page() allocates a new huge page and > > > takes two references: one for caller and one for shrinker. We free the > > > page only in shrinker callback if counter is 1 (only shrinker has the > > > reference). > > > > > > put_huge_zero_page() only decrements counter. Counter is never zero > > > in put_huge_zero_page() since shrinker holds on reference. > > > > > > Freeing huge zero page in shrinker callback helps to avoid frequent > > > allocate-free. > > > > I'd like more details on this please. The cost of freeing then > > reinstantiating that page is tremendous, because it has to be zeroed > > out again. If there is any way at all in which the kernel can be made > > to enter a high-frequency free/reinstantiate pattern then I expect the > > effects would be quite bad. > > > > Do we have sufficient mechanisms in there to prevent this from > > happening in all cases? If so, what are they, because I'm not seeing > > them? > > We only free huge zero page in shrinker callback if nobody in the system > uses it. Never on put_huge_zero_page(). Shrinker runs only under memory > pressure or if user asks (drop_caches). > Do you think we need an additional protection mechanism? Andrew? > > > Refcounting has cost. On 4 socket machine I observe ~1% slowdown on > > > parallel (40 processes) read page faulting comparing to lazy huge page > > > allocation. I think it's pretty reasonable for synthetic benchmark. > > -- > Kirill A. Shutemov -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/