linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 10/13] mm/mempolicy: VMA allocation for many preferred
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 11:40:07 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1615952410-36895-11-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1615952410-36895-1-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com>

From: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>

This patch implements MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY for alloc_pages_vma(). Like
alloc_pages_current(), alloc_pages_vma() needs to support policy based
decisions if they've been configured via mbind(2).

The temporary "hack" of treating MPOL_PREFERRED and MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY
can now be removed with this, too.

All the actual machinery to make this work was part of
("mm/mempolicy: Create a page allocator for policy")

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200630212517.308045-11-ben.widawsky@intel.com
Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
---
 mm/mempolicy.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index a92efe7..8fe76a7 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -2273,8 +2273,6 @@ alloc_pages_vma(gfp_t gfp, int order, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 {
 	struct mempolicy *pol;
 	struct page *page;
-	int preferred_nid;
-	nodemask_t *nmask;
 
 	pol = get_vma_policy(vma, addr);
 
@@ -2288,6 +2286,7 @@ alloc_pages_vma(gfp_t gfp, int order, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 	}
 
 	if (unlikely(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE) && hugepage)) {
+		nodemask_t *nmask;
 		int hpage_node = node;
 
 		/*
@@ -2301,10 +2300,26 @@ alloc_pages_vma(gfp_t gfp, int order, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 		 * does not allow the current node in its nodemask, we allocate
 		 * the standard way.
 		 */
-		if ((pol->mode == MPOL_PREFERRED ||
-		     pol->mode == MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY) &&
-		    !(pol->flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL))
+		if (pol->mode == MPOL_PREFERRED || !(pol->flags & MPOL_F_LOCAL)) {
 			hpage_node = first_node(pol->nodes);
+		} else if (pol->mode == MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY) {
+			struct zoneref *z;
+
+			/*
+			 * In this policy, with direct reclaim, the normal
+			 * policy based allocation will do the right thing - try
+			 * twice using the preferred nodes first, and all nodes
+			 * second.
+			 */
+			if (gfp & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM) {
+				page = alloc_pages_policy(pol, gfp, order, NUMA_NO_NODE);
+				goto out;
+			}
+
+			z = first_zones_zonelist(node_zonelist(numa_node_id(), GFP_HIGHUSER),
+						 gfp_zone(GFP_HIGHUSER), &pol->nodes);
+			hpage_node = zone_to_nid(z->zone);
+		}
 
 		nmask = policy_nodemask(gfp, pol);
 		if (!nmask || node_isset(hpage_node, *nmask)) {
@@ -2330,9 +2345,7 @@ alloc_pages_vma(gfp_t gfp, int order, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 		}
 	}
 
-	nmask = policy_nodemask(gfp, pol);
-	preferred_nid = policy_node(gfp, pol, node);
-	page = __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp, order, preferred_nid, nmask);
+	page = alloc_pages_policy(pol, gfp, order, NUMA_NO_NODE);
 	mpol_cond_put(pol);
 out:
 	return page;
-- 
2.7.4



  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-03-17  3:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-17  3:39 [PATCH v4 00/13] Introduced multi-preference mempolicy Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:39 ` [PATCH v4 01/13] mm/mempolicy: Add comment for missing LOCAL Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:39 ` [PATCH v4 02/13] mm/mempolicy: convert single preferred_node to full nodemask Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:17   ` Michal Hocko
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 03/13] mm/mempolicy: Add MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY for multiple preferred nodes Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:50   ` Michal Hocko
2021-04-20  7:16     ` Feng Tang
2021-05-13  7:23       ` Feng Tang
2021-05-13  7:25       ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] mempolicy: kill MPOL_F_LOCAL bit Feng Tang
2021-05-13 13:55         ` Andi Kleen
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 04/13] mm/mempolicy: allow preferred code to take a nodemask Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:55   ` Michal Hocko
2021-04-19  8:49     ` Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 05/13] mm/mempolicy: refactor rebind code for PREFERRED_MANY Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:57   ` Michal Hocko
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 06/13] mm/mempolicy: kill v.preferred_nodes Feng Tang
2021-04-14 12:58   ` Michal Hocko
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 07/13] mm/mempolicy: handle MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY like BIND Feng Tang
2021-04-14 13:01   ` Michal Hocko
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 08/13] mm/mempolicy: Create a page allocator for policy Feng Tang
2021-04-14 13:08   ` Michal Hocko
2021-04-15  8:17     ` Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 09/13] mm/mempolicy: Thread allocation for many preferred Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` Feng Tang [this message]
2021-04-14 13:14   ` [PATCH v4 10/13] mm/mempolicy: VMA " Michal Hocko
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 11/13] mm/mempolicy: huge-page " Feng Tang
2021-03-17  7:19   ` kernel test robot
2021-04-14 13:25   ` Michal Hocko
2021-04-15  7:41     ` Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 12/13] mm/mempolicy: Advertise new MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY Feng Tang
2021-03-17  3:40 ` [PATCH v4 13/13] mem/mempolicy: unify mpol_new_preferred() and mpol_new_preferred_many() Feng Tang
2021-04-14 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 00/13] Introduced multi-preference mempolicy Michal Hocko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1615952410-36895-11-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com \
    --to=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ben.widawsky@intel.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).