From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Justin He <Justin.He@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Steve Capper <Steve.Capper@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <Anshuman.Khandual@arm.com>,
Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@chromium.org>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com>,
Kaly Xin <Kaly.Xin@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] decrease unnecessary gap due to pmem kmem alignment
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 15:03:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <170d7861-4df8-ecaf-dbdd-9e9a4a832f8f@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200729130025.GD3672596@linux.ibm.com>
On 29.07.20 15:00, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 11:35:20AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 29.07.20 11:31, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>> Hi Justin,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 08:27:58AM +0000, Justin He wrote:
>>>> Hi David
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Without this series, if qemu creates a 4G bytes nvdimm device, we can
>>>>> only
>>>>>> use 2G bytes for dax pmem(kmem) in the worst case.
>>>>>> e.g.
>>>>>> 240000000-33fdfffff : Persistent Memory
>>>>>> We can only use the memblock between [240000000, 2ffffffff] due to the
>>>>> hard
>>>>>> limitation. It wastes too much memory space.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Decreasing the SECTION_SIZE_BITS on arm64 might be an alternative, but
>>>>> there
>>>>>> are too many concerns from other constraints, e.g. PAGE_SIZE, hugetlb,
>>>>>> SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, page bits in struct page ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Beside decreasing the SECTION_SIZE_BITS, we can also relax the kmem
>>>>> alignment
>>>>>> with memory_block_size_bytes().
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tested on arm64 guest and x86 guest, qemu creates a 4G pmem device. dax
>>>>> pmem
>>>>>> can be used as ram with smaller gap. Also the kmem hotplug add/remove
>>>>> are both
>>>>>> tested on arm64/x86 guest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not convinced this use case is worth such hacks (that’s what it is)
>>>>> for now. On real machines pmem is big - your example (losing 50% is
>>>>> extreme).
>>>>>
>>>>> I would much rather want to see the section size on arm64 reduced. I
>>>>> remember there were patches and that at least with a base page size of 4k
>>>>> it can be reduced drastically (64k base pages are more problematic due to
>>>>> the ridiculous THP size of 512M). But could be a section size of 512 is
>>>>> possible on all configs right now.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I once investigated how to reduce section size on arm64 thoughtfully:
>>>> There are many constraints for reducing SECTION_SIZE_BITS
>>>> 1. Given page->flags bits is limited, SECTION_SIZE_BITS can't be reduced too
>>>> much.
>>>> 2. Once CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP is enabled, section id will not be counted
>>>> into page->flags.
>>>> 3. MAX_ORDER depends on SECTION_SIZE_BITS
>>>> - 3.1 mmzone.h
>>>> #if (MAX_ORDER - 1 + PAGE_SHIFT) > SECTION_SIZE_BITS
>>>> #error Allocator MAX_ORDER exceeds SECTION_SIZE
>>>> #endif
>>>> - 3.2 hugepage_init()
>>>> MAYBE_BUILD_BUG_ON(HPAGE_PMD_ORDER >= MAX_ORDER);
>>>>
>>>> Hence when ARM64_4K_PAGES && CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP are enabled,
>>>> SECTION_SIZE_BITS can be reduced to 27.
>>>> But when ARM64_64K_PAGES, given 3.2, MAX_ORDER > 29-16 = 13.
>>>> Given 3.1 SECTION_SIZE_BITS >= MAX_ORDER+15 > 28. So SECTION_SIZE_BITS can not
>>>> be reduced to 27.
>>>>
>>>> In one word, if we considered to reduce SECTION_SIZE_BITS on arm64, the Kconfig
>>>> might be very complicated,e.g. we still need to consider the case for
>>>> ARM64_16K_PAGES.
>>>
>>> It is not necessary to pollute Kconfig with that.
>>> arch/arm64/include/asm/sparesemem.h can have something like
>>>
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES
>>> #define SPARSE_SECTION_SIZE 29
>>> #elif defined(CONFIG_ARM16K_PAGES)
>>> #define SPARSE_SECTION_SIZE 28
>>> #elif defined(CONFIG_ARM4K_PAGES)
>>> #define SPARSE_SECTION_SIZE 27
>>> #else
>>> #error
>>> #endif
>>
>> ack
>>
>>>
>>> There is still large gap with ARM64_64K_PAGES, though.
>>>
>>> As for SPARSEMEM without VMEMMAP, are there actual benefits to use it?
>>
>> I was asking myself the same question a while ago and didn't really find
>> a compelling one.
>
> Memory overhead for VMEMMAP is larger, especially for arm64 that knows
> how to free empty parts of the memory map with "classic" SPARSEMEM.
You mean the hole punching within section memmap? (which is why their
pfn_valid() implementation is special)
(I do wonder why that shouldn't work with VMEMMAP, or is it simply not
implemented?)
>
>> I think it's always enabled as default (SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP_ENABLE) and
>> would require config tweaks to even disable it.
>
> Nope, it's right there in menuconfig,
>
> "Memory Management options" -> "Sparse Memory virtual memmap"
Ah, good to know.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-29 13:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-29 3:34 [RFC PATCH 0/6] decrease unnecessary gap due to pmem kmem alignment Jia He
2020-07-29 3:34 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] mm/memory_hotplug: remove redundant memory block size alignment check Jia He
2020-07-29 3:34 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] resource: export find_next_iomem_res() helper Jia He
2020-07-29 3:34 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] mm/memory_hotplug: allow pmem kmem not to align with memory_block_size Jia He
2020-07-29 3:34 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] mm/page_alloc: adjust the start,end in dax pmem kmem case Jia He
2020-07-29 3:34 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] device-dax: relax the memblock size alignment for kmem_start Jia He
2020-07-29 3:34 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] arm64: fall back to vmemmap_populate_basepages if not aligned with PMD_SIZE Jia He
2020-07-29 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] decrease unnecessary gap due to pmem kmem alignment David Hildenbrand
2020-07-29 8:27 ` Justin He
2020-07-29 8:44 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-07-29 9:31 ` Mike Rapoport
2020-07-29 9:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-07-29 13:00 ` Mike Rapoport
2020-07-29 13:03 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2020-07-29 14:12 ` Mike Rapoport
2020-07-30 2:17 ` Justin He
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=170d7861-4df8-ecaf-dbdd-9e9a4a832f8f@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=Anshuman.Khandual@arm.com \
--cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
--cc=Justin.He@arm.com \
--cc=Kaly.Xin@arm.com \
--cc=Mark.Rutland@arm.com \
--cc=Steve.Capper@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hsinyi@chromium.org \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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).