linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@techadventures.net>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, pasha.tatashin@oracle.com,
	vbabka@suse.cz, aaron.lu@intel.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] mm/page_alloc: Optimize free_area_init_core
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 17:15:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180719151555.GH7193@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180719140327.GB10988@techadventures.net>

On Thu 19-07-18 16:03:27, Oscar Salvador wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 03:44:17PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 19-07-18 15:27:38, osalvador@techadventures.net wrote:
> > > From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
> > > 
> > > In free_area_init_core we calculate the amount of managed pages
> > > we are left with, by substracting the memmap pages and the pages
> > > reserved for dma.
> > > With the values left, we also account the total of kernel pages and
> > > the total of pages.
> > > 
> > > Since memmap pages are calculated from zone->spanned_pages,
> > > let us only do these calculcations whenever zone->spanned_pages is greather
> > > than 0.
> > 
> > But why do we care? How do we test this? In other words, why is this
> > worth merging?
>  
> Uhm, unless the values are going to be updated, why do we want to go through all
> comparasions/checks?
> I thought it was a nice thing to have the chance to skip that block unless we are going to
> update the counters.
> 
> Again, if you think this only adds complexity and no good, I can drop it.

Your changelog doesn't really explain the motivation. Does the change
help performance? Is this a pure cleanup?

The function is certainly not an example of beauty. It is more an
example of changes done on top of older ones without much thinking. But
I do not see your change would make it so much better. I would consider
it a much nicer cleanup if it was split into logical units each doing
one specific thing.

Btw. are you sure this change is correct? E.g.
		/*
		 * Set an approximate value for lowmem here, it will be adjusted
		 * when the bootmem allocator frees pages into the buddy system.
		 * And all highmem pages will be managed by the buddy system.
		 */
		zone->managed_pages = is_highmem_idx(j) ? realsize : freesize;

expects freesize to be calculated properly and just from quick reading
the code I do not see why skipping other adjustments is ok for size > 0.
Maybe this is OK, I dunno and my brain is already heading few days off
but a real cleanup wouldn't even make me think what the heck is going on
here.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-19 15:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-19 13:27 [PATCH v2 0/5] Refactor free_area_init_node/free_area_init_core osalvador
2018-07-19 13:27 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] mm/page_alloc: Move ifdefery out of free_area_init_core osalvador
2018-07-19 13:27 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: access zone->node via zone_to_nid() and zone_set_nid() osalvador
2018-07-19 13:40   ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-19 13:44     ` Pavel Tatashin
2018-07-19 13:47       ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-19 13:27 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mm/page_alloc: Optimize free_area_init_core osalvador
2018-07-19 13:44   ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-19 14:03     ` Oscar Salvador
2018-07-19 15:15       ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2018-07-19 20:52         ` Oscar Salvador
2018-07-20 10:03           ` Oscar Salvador
2018-07-23  8:35             ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-23 11:42               ` Oscar Salvador
2018-07-23  8:30           ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-19 13:27 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] mm/page_alloc: Inline function to handle CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT osalvador
2018-07-19 13:45   ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-19 13:27 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] mm/page_alloc: Only call pgdat_set_deferred_range when the system boots osalvador
2018-07-19 13:46   ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-19 13:58     ` Oscar Salvador
2018-07-19 14:03       ` Michal Hocko
2018-07-19 14:27         ` Pavel Tatashin
2018-07-19 15:01           ` Oscar Salvador

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=20180719151555.GH7193@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=aaron.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=osalvador@techadventures.net \
    --cc=pasha.tatashin@oracle.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).