lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Patch 001/005](memory hotplug) register section/node id to free
> > Index: current/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
> > ===================================================================
> > --- current.orig/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h 2008-04-07 16:06:49.000000000 +0900
> > +++ current/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h 2008-04-07 16:33:12.000000000 +0900
> > @@ -11,6 +11,15 @@
> > struct mem_section;
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Magic number for free bootmem.
> > + * The normal smallest mapcount is -1. Here is smaller value than it.
> > + */
> > +#define SECTION_INFO 0xfffffffe
> > +#define MIX_INFO 0xfffffffd
> > +#define NODE_INFO 0xfffffffc
>
> Perhaps these should be defined relative to -1 to make that very
> explicit.
>
> #define SECTION_INFO (-1 - 1)
> #define MIX_INFO (-1 - 2)
> #define NODE_INFO (-1 - 3)
>

Ah, ok. I'll change them.

> Also from a scan of this patch I cannot see why I might care about the
> type of these. Yes it appears you are going to need a marker to say
> which bootmem pages are under this reference counted scheme and which
> are not. From a review perspective having some clue in the leader about
> the type and why we care would help.
>
> >From the names I was expecting SECTION related info, NODE related info,
> and a MIXture of things. However, SECTION seems to be the actual sections,
> NODE seems to be pgdat information, MIX seems to be usemap? Why is it
> not USEMAP here? Possibily I will find out in a later patch but a clue
> here might help.

MIX_INFO might not be good name. I intended it was MIX_SECTION_INFO.
When SECTION_INFO is specified, section_number in ->private
can be checked which section uses this page.
This is important for dependency check.

When MIX_(SECTION_)INFO is specified, many sections uses this page.
So, dependency check is not possible.
Currently, this type is used for just usemap. But I thought other feature
may use it later...



> > Index: current/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- current.orig/mm/memory_hotplug.c 2008-04-07 16:06:49.000000000 +0900
> > +++ current/mm/memory_hotplug.c 2008-04-07 20:08:13.000000000 +0900
> > @@ -59,8 +59,105 @@
> > return;
> > }
> >
> > -
> > #ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG_SPARSE
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
> > +static void get_page_bootmem(unsigned long info, struct page *page, int magic)
> > +{
> > + atomic_set(&page->_mapcount, magic);
> > + SetPagePrivate(page);
> > + set_page_private(page, info);
> > + atomic_inc(&page->_count);
> > +}
>
> Although I guess these 'magic' constants are effectivly magic numbers it
> is also the type. So I do wonder if this would be better called type.

Ah, if you feel type is better than magic, then I'll change it.
To be honest, I feel I'm not good at naming of functions/parameters.
So, good advice is welcome.


> > +
> > +void put_page_bootmem(struct page *page)
> > +{
> > + int magic;
> > +
> > + magic = atomic_read(&page->_mapcount);
> > + BUG_ON(magic >= -1);
> > +
> > + if (atomic_dec_return(&page->_count) == 1) {
> > + ClearPagePrivate(page);
> > + set_page_private(page, 0);
> > + reset_page_mapcount(page);
> > + __free_pages_bootmem(page, 0);
> > + }
> > +
> > +}
>
> That seems pretty sensible, using _count to track track the number of
> users of this page to allow it to be tracked. But there was no mention
> of this in the changelog, so I was about to complain that the get_ was a
> strange name for something which set the magic numbers. It mirroring
> get_page, put_page makes the name sensible. But please document that in
> the changelog.

Ah, sorry.

> The BUG in put_page_bootmem I assume is effectivly saying "this page was
> not reference counted and so cannot be freed with this call". Is there
> anything stopping us simply reference counting all bootmem allocations
> in this manner? So that any of them could be released?

This count is just set for only memory management structure.

>
> Also how does this scheme cope with things being merged into the end of
> the blocks you mark as freeable. bootmem can pack small things into the
> end of the previous allocation if they fit and alignment allows. Is it
> not possible that such allocations would get packed in, but not
> accounted for in the _count so that when hotplug frees these things the
> bootmem page would get dropped, but still have useful data in it?

(See second patch)

>
> > +
> > +void register_page_bootmem_info_section(unsigned long start_pfn)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long *usemap, mapsize, section_nr, i;
> > + struct mem_section *ms;
> > + struct page *page, *memmap;
> > +
> > + if (!pfn_valid(start_pfn))
> > + return;
> > +
> > + section_nr = pfn_to_section_nr(start_pfn);
> > + ms = __nr_to_section(section_nr);
> > +
> > + /* Get section's memmap address */
> > + memmap = sparse_decode_mem_map(ms->section_mem_map, section_nr);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Get page for the memmap's phys address
> > + * XXX: need more consideration for sparse_vmemmap...
> > + */
> > + page = virt_to_page(memmap);
> > + mapsize = sizeof(struct page) * PAGES_PER_SECTION;
> > + mapsize = PAGE_ALIGN(mapsize) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > +
> > + /* remember memmap's page */
> > + for (i = 0; i < mapsize; i++, page++)
> > + get_page_bootmem(section_nr, page, SECTION_INFO);
> > +
> > + usemap = __nr_to_section(section_nr)->pageblock_flags;
> > + page = virt_to_page(usemap);
> > +
> > + mapsize = PAGE_ALIGN(usemap_size()) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < mapsize; i++, page++)
> > + get_page_bootmem(section_nr, page, MIX_INFO);
> > +
>
> I am concerned that some of these pages might be in the numa remap space?
> If they are they were not part of bootmem, will they free correctly in the
> same manner? They are necessarily not mapped at the correct kernel virtual
> address so the __pa() is not going to find the right struct page is it?

Good point. Yes. You are right.

>
> Perhaps if you simply reference counted all bootmem allocations you
> would avoid this problem?

No. At least offline_pages() must distinguish followings
A) a page will be not necessary later.
B) a page is really busy

A) is the pages for section's memmap, pgdat and so on.
B) is others

A) must be isolated final phase of memory hotplug, because they used by
page offlining themselves. But offline_pages() is prior than final phase.

B) should be freed before offline_pages(). If it is busy, offline_pages should
be canceled.


> > Index: current/mm/sparse.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- current.orig/mm/sparse.c 2008-04-07 16:06:49.000000000 +0900
> > +++ current/mm/sparse.c 2008-04-07 20:08:16.000000000 +0900
> > @@ -200,7 +200,6 @@
> > /*
> > * Decode mem_map from the coded memmap
> > */
> > -static
> > struct page *sparse_decode_mem_map(unsigned long coded_mem_map, unsigned long pnum)
> > {
> > /* mask off the extra low bits of information */
> > @@ -223,7 +222,7 @@
> > return 1;
> > }
> >
> > -static unsigned long usemap_size(void)
> > +unsigned long usemap_size(void)
> > {
> > unsigned long size_bytes;
> > size_bytes = roundup(SECTION_BLOCKFLAGS_BITS, 8) / 8;
> >
>
> I wonder if these export changes might make more sense as a separate
> patch, they are effectivly just noise.

Ah, yes. It should be separated. Sorry.

Thanks.

--
Yasunori Goto




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-16 16:11    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans