From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, peterz@infradead.org,
christoffer.dall@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com,
kirill@shutemov.name, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
steve.capper@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, robin.murphy@arm.com,
aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, vbabka@suse.cz, shakeelb@google.com,
rientjes@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 04:12:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f9f333a5-5533-996a-dc8e-1ff1096c1d19@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190113173555.GC1578@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 01/13/2019 11:05 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 12-01-19 15:56:38, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> All architectures have been defining their own PGALLOC_GFP as (GFP_KERNEL |
>> __GFP_ZERO) and using it for allocating page table pages. This causes some
>> code duplication which can be easily avoided. GFP_KERNEL allocated and
>> cleared out pages (__GFP_ZERO) are required for page tables on any given
>> architecture. This creates a new generic GFP flag flag which can be used
>> for any page table page allocation. Does not cause any functional change.
>
> I agree that some unification is due but GFP_PGTABLE is not something to
> expose in generic gfp.h IMHO. It just risks an abuse. I would be looking
Why would you think that it risks an abuse ? It does not create new semantics
of allocation in the buddy. Its just uses existing GFP_KERNEL allocation which
is then getting zeroed out. The risks (if any) is exactly same as GFP_KERNEL.
> at providing asm-generic implementation and reuse it to remove the code
Does that mean GFP_PGTABLE can be created but not in gfp.h but in some other
memory related header file ?
> duplication. But I haven't tried that to know that it will work out due
> to small/subtle differences between arches.
IIUC from the allocation perspective GFP_ACCOUNT is the only thing which gets
added with GFP_PGTABLE for user page table for memcg accounting purpose. There
does not seem to be any other differences unless I am missing something.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, peterz@infradead.org,
christoffer.dall@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com,
kirill@shutemov.name, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
steve.capper@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, robin.murphy@arm.com,
aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, vbabka@suse.cz, shakeelb@google.com,
rientjes@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 09:30:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f9f333a5-5533-996a-dc8e-1ff1096c1d19@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190113173555.GC1578@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 01/13/2019 11:05 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 12-01-19 15:56:38, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> All architectures have been defining their own PGALLOC_GFP as (GFP_KERNEL |
>> __GFP_ZERO) and using it for allocating page table pages. This causes some
>> code duplication which can be easily avoided. GFP_KERNEL allocated and
>> cleared out pages (__GFP_ZERO) are required for page tables on any given
>> architecture. This creates a new generic GFP flag flag which can be used
>> for any page table page allocation. Does not cause any functional change.
>
> I agree that some unification is due but GFP_PGTABLE is not something to
> expose in generic gfp.h IMHO. It just risks an abuse. I would be looking
Why would you think that it risks an abuse ? It does not create new semantics
of allocation in the buddy. Its just uses existing GFP_KERNEL allocation which
is then getting zeroed out. The risks (if any) is exactly same as GFP_KERNEL.
> at providing asm-generic implementation and reuse it to remove the code
Does that mean GFP_PGTABLE can be created but not in gfp.h but in some other
memory related header file ?
> duplication. But I haven't tried that to know that it will work out due
> to small/subtle differences between arches.
IIUC from the allocation perspective GFP_ACCOUNT is the only thing which gets
added with GFP_PGTABLE for user page table for memcg accounting purpose. There
does not seem to be any other differences unless I am missing something.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
mingo@redhat.com, vbabka@suse.cz, rientjes@google.com,
marc.zyngier@arm.com, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
shakeelb@google.com, kirill@shutemov.name, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, steve.capper@arm.com,
christoffer.dall@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com,
aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 09:30:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f9f333a5-5533-996a-dc8e-1ff1096c1d19@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190113173555.GC1578@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 01/13/2019 11:05 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 12-01-19 15:56:38, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> All architectures have been defining their own PGALLOC_GFP as (GFP_KERNEL |
>> __GFP_ZERO) and using it for allocating page table pages. This causes some
>> code duplication which can be easily avoided. GFP_KERNEL allocated and
>> cleared out pages (__GFP_ZERO) are required for page tables on any given
>> architecture. This creates a new generic GFP flag flag which can be used
>> for any page table page allocation. Does not cause any functional change.
>
> I agree that some unification is due but GFP_PGTABLE is not something to
> expose in generic gfp.h IMHO. It just risks an abuse. I would be looking
Why would you think that it risks an abuse ? It does not create new semantics
of allocation in the buddy. Its just uses existing GFP_KERNEL allocation which
is then getting zeroed out. The risks (if any) is exactly same as GFP_KERNEL.
> at providing asm-generic implementation and reuse it to remove the code
Does that mean GFP_PGTABLE can be created but not in gfp.h but in some other
memory related header file ?
> duplication. But I haven't tried that to know that it will work out due
> to small/subtle differences between arches.
IIUC from the allocation perspective GFP_ACCOUNT is the only thing which gets
added with GFP_PGTABLE for user page table for memcg accounting purpose. There
does not seem to be any other differences unless I am missing something.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
linux@armlinux.org.uk, mingo@redhat.com, vbabka@suse.cz,
rientjes@google.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com,
rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, shakeelb@google.com,
kirill@shutemov.name, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, steve.capper@arm.com,
christoffer.dall@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com,
aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 09:30:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f9f333a5-5533-996a-dc8e-1ff1096c1d19@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190113173555.GC1578@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 01/13/2019 11:05 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 12-01-19 15:56:38, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> All architectures have been defining their own PGALLOC_GFP as (GFP_KERNEL |
>> __GFP_ZERO) and using it for allocating page table pages. This causes some
>> code duplication which can be easily avoided. GFP_KERNEL allocated and
>> cleared out pages (__GFP_ZERO) are required for page tables on any given
>> architecture. This creates a new generic GFP flag flag which can be used
>> for any page table page allocation. Does not cause any functional change.
>
> I agree that some unification is due but GFP_PGTABLE is not something to
> expose in generic gfp.h IMHO. It just risks an abuse. I would be looking
Why would you think that it risks an abuse ? It does not create new semantics
of allocation in the buddy. Its just uses existing GFP_KERNEL allocation which
is then getting zeroed out. The risks (if any) is exactly same as GFP_KERNEL.
> at providing asm-generic implementation and reuse it to remove the code
Does that mean GFP_PGTABLE can be created but not in gfp.h but in some other
memory related header file ?
> duplication. But I haven't tried that to know that it will work out due
> to small/subtle differences between arches.
IIUC from the allocation perspective GFP_ACCOUNT is the only thing which gets
added with GFP_PGTABLE for user page table for memcg accounting purpose. There
does not seem to be any other differences unless I am missing something.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-14 4:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-12 10:26 [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 10:38 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 10:26 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 10:26 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 10:26 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 12:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 12:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 12:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 12:55 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:56 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:55 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:55 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:55 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 13:49 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-12 13:49 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-12 13:49 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-12 13:49 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-12 15:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 15:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 15:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 15:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-14 4:28 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:40 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:28 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:28 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:28 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-14 4:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:26 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-14 4:00 ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
2019-01-14 4:12 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:00 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:00 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 7:01 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-14 7:01 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-14 7:01 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-14 7:01 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-15 14:11 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-15 14:23 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-15 14:11 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-15 14:11 ` Anshuman Khandual
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=f9f333a5-5533-996a-dc8e-1ff1096c1d19@arm.com \
--to=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=christoffer.dall@arm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.