From: Arun KS <arunks@codeaurora.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
vbabka@suse.cz, pasha.tatashin@oracle.com,
iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, osalvador@suse.de, malat@debian.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, yasu.isimatu@gmail.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
arunks.linux@gmail.com, vinmenon@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] memory_hotplug: Free pages as pageblock_order
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 20:12:30 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9d8dfd50046036a7b4e730738940014d@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180912131724.GH10951@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 2018-09-12 18:47, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 12-09-18 22:57:43, Balbir Singh wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 12:38:53PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> > On Wed 12-09-18 14:56:45, Arun KS wrote:
>> > > When free pages are done with pageblock_order, time spend on
>> > > coalescing pages by buddy allocator can be reduced. With
>> > > section size of 256MB, hot add latency of a single section
>> > > shows improvement from 50-60 ms to less than 1 ms, hence
>> > > improving the hot add latency by 60%.
>> >
>> > Where does the improvement come from? You are still doing the same
>> > amount of work except that the number of callbacks is lower. Is this the
>> > real source of 60% improvement?
>> >
>>
>> It looks like only the first page of the pageblock is initialized, is
>> some of the cost amortized in terms of doing one initialization for
>> the page with order (order) and then relying on split_page and helpers
>> to do the rest? Of course the number of callbacks reduce by a
>> significant
>> number as well.
>
> Ohh, I have missed that part. Now when re-reading I can see the reason
> for the perf improvement. It is most likely the higher order free which
> ends up being much cheaper. This part makes some sense.
>
> How much is this feasible is another question. Do not forget we have
> those external providers of the online callback and those would need to
> be updated as well.
Sure Michal, I ll look into this.
>
> Btw. the normal memmap init code path does the same per-page free as
> well. If we really want to speed the hotplug path then I guess the init
> one would see a bigger improvement and those two should be in sync.
Thanks for pointers, Will look further.
>
>> > >
>> > > If this looks okey, I'll modify users of set_online_page_callback
>> > > and resend clean patch.
>> >
>> > [...]
>> >
>> > > +static int generic_online_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order);
>> > > +static online_pages_callback_t online_pages_callback = generic_online_pages;
>> > > +
>> > > +static int generic_online_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
>> > > +{
>> > > + unsigned long nr_pages = 1 << order;
>> > > + struct page *p = page;
>> > > + unsigned int loop;
>> > > +
>> > > + for (loop = 0 ; loop < nr_pages ; loop++, p++) {
>> > > + __ClearPageReserved(p);
>> > > + set_page_count(p, 0);
>
> btw. you want init_page_count here.
Do you mean replace set_page_count(p, 0) with init_page_count(page)?
Because init_page_count is setting the page _refcount to 1
static inline void init_page_count(struct page *page)
{
set_page_count(page, 1);
}
I thought in case of higher order pages only the first struct page
should have _refcount to 1 before calling __free_pages(). Please correct
me if wrong.
Regards,
Arun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-12 14:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-12 9:26 [RFC] memory_hotplug: Free pages as pageblock_order Arun KS
2018-09-12 10:38 ` Michal Hocko
2018-09-12 12:57 ` Balbir Singh
2018-09-12 13:17 ` Michal Hocko
2018-09-12 14:42 ` Arun KS [this message]
2018-09-14 9:10 ` Michal Hocko
2018-09-19 1:18 ` Arun KS
2018-09-12 14:09 ` Arun KS
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=9d8dfd50046036a7b4e730738940014d@codeaurora.org \
--to=arunks@codeaurora.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arunks.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=malat@debian.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@oracle.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=vinmenon@codeaurora.org \
--cc=yasu.isimatu@gmail.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).