From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Toshiki Fukasawa <t-fukasawa@vx.jp.nec.com>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"mhocko@kernel.org" <mhocko@kernel.org>,
"adobriyan@gmail.com" <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
"hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>,
"longman@redhat.com" <longman@redhat.com>,
"sfr@canb.auug.org.au" <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
"mst@redhat.com" <mst@redhat.com>, "cai@lca.pw" <cai@lca.pw>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: Introduce subsection_dev_map
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 20:53:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6193C847-F09C-439A-81EE-98A59473D582@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4iPk4bzOCE=7Eq8w-jwUuOXzZP9F=+RcxjqdXCn0SC01A@mail.gmail.com>
> Am 13.11.2019 um 20:06 schrieb Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>:
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 10:51 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 08.11.19 20:13, Dan Williams wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 4:15 PM Toshiki Fukasawa
>>> <t-fukasawa@vx.jp.nec.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Currently, there is no way to identify pfn on ZONE_DEVICE.
>>>> Identifying pfn on system memory can be done by using a
>>>> section-level flag. On the other hand, identifying pfn on
>>>> ZONE_DEVICE requires a subsection-level flag since ZONE_DEVICE
>>>> can be created in units of subsections.
>>>>
>>>> This patch introduces a new bitmap subsection_dev_map so that
>>>> we can identify pfn on ZONE_DEVICE.
>>>>
>>>> Also, subsection_dev_map is used to prove that struct pages
>>>> included in the subsection have been initialized since it is
>>>> set after memmap_init_zone_device(). We can avoid accessing
>>>> pages currently being initialized by checking subsection_dev_map.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Toshiki Fukasawa <t-fukasawa@vx.jp.nec.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> include/linux/mmzone.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>> mm/memremap.c | 2 ++
>>>> mm/sparse.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
>>>> index bda2028..11376c4 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
>>>> @@ -1174,11 +1174,17 @@ static inline unsigned long section_nr_to_pfn(unsigned long sec)
>>>>
>>>> struct mem_section_usage {
>>>> DECLARE_BITMAP(subsection_map, SUBSECTIONS_PER_SECTION);
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ZONE_DEVICE
>>>> + DECLARE_BITMAP(subsection_dev_map, SUBSECTIONS_PER_SECTION);
>>>> +#endif
>>>
>>> Hi Toshiki,
>>>
>>> There is currently an effort to remove the PageReserved() flag as some
>>> code is using that to detect ZONE_DEVICE. In reviewing those patches
>>> we realized that what many code paths want is to detect online memory.
>>> So instead of a subsection_dev_map add a subsection_online_map. That
>>> way pfn_to_online_page() can reliably avoid ZONE_DEVICE ranges. I
>>> otherwise question the use case for pfn_walkers to return pages for
>>> ZONE_DEVICE pages, I think the skip behavior when pfn_to_online_page()
>>> == false is the right behavior.
>>
>> To be more precise, I recommended an subsection_active_map, to indicate
>> which memmaps were fully initialized and can safely be touched (e.g., to
>> read the zone/nid). This map would also be set when the devmem memmaps
>> were initialized (race between adding memory/growing the section and
>> initializing the memmap).
>>
>> See
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/10/10/87
>>
>> and
>>
>> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-driver-devel/msg130012.html
>
> I'm still struggling to understand the motivation of distinguishing
> "active" as something distinct from "online". As long as the "online"
> granularity is improved from sections down to subsections then most
> code paths are good to go. The others can use get_devpagemap() to
> check for ZONE_DEVICE in a race free manner as they currently do.
I thought we wanted to unify access if we don’t really care about the zone as in most pfn walkers - E.g., for zone shrinking. Anyhow, a subsection online map would be a good start, we can reuse that later for ZONE_DEVICE as well.
>
>> I dislike a map that is specific to ZONE_DEVICE or (currently)
>> !ZONE_DEVICE. I rather want an indication "this memmap is safe to
>> touch". As discussed along the mentioned threads, we can combine this
>> later with RCU to handle some races that are currently possible.
>
> The rcu protection is independent of the pfn_active vs pfn_online
> distinction afaics.
It’s one part of the bigger picture IMHO.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-13 19:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-08 0:08 [PATCH 0/3] make pfn walker support ZONE_DEVICE Toshiki Fukasawa
2019-11-08 0:08 ` [PATCH 1/3] procfs: refactor kpage_*_read() in fs/proc/page.c Toshiki Fukasawa
2019-11-08 0:08 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm: Introduce subsection_dev_map Toshiki Fukasawa
2019-11-08 19:13 ` Dan Williams
2019-11-13 18:51 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-13 19:06 ` Dan Williams
2019-11-13 19:53 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2019-11-13 20:10 ` Dan Williams
2019-11-13 20:23 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-13 20:40 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-13 21:11 ` Dan Williams
2019-11-13 21:22 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-13 21:26 ` Dan Williams
2019-11-14 23:36 ` Toshiki Fukasawa
2019-11-15 0:46 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-15 2:57 ` Toshiki Fukasawa
2019-11-08 0:08 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm: make pfn walker support ZONE_DEVICE Toshiki Fukasawa
2019-11-09 17:08 ` kbuild test robot
2019-11-09 19:14 ` kbuild test robot
2019-11-08 9:18 ` [PATCH 0/3] " Michal Hocko
2019-11-11 8:00 ` Toshiki Fukasawa
2019-11-11 16:23 ` Dan Williams
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=6193C847-F09C-439A-81EE-98A59473D582@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=t-fukasawa@vx.jp.nec.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 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).