From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@redhat.com>,
Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@gmail.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@mellanox.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, brouer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: in_irq_or_nmi()
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:59:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170329105928.609bc581@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170329081219.lto7t4fwmponokzh@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:12:19 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 09:58:17AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 05:15:00PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > > And I also verified it worked:
> > >
> > > 0.63 │ mov __preempt_count,%eax
> > > │ free_hot_cold_page():
> > > 1.25 │ test $0x1f0000,%eax
> > > │ ↓ jne 1e4
> > >
> > > And this simplification also made the compiler change this into a
> > > unlikely branch, which is a micro-optimization (that I will leave up to
> > > the compiler).
> >
> > Excellent! That said, I think we should define in_irq_or_nmi() in
> > preempt.h, rather than hiding it in the memory allocator. And since we're
> > doing that, we might as well make it look like the other definitions:
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/preempt.h b/include/linux/preempt.h
> > index 7eeceac52dea..af98c29abd9d 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/preempt.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/preempt.h
> > @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@
> > #define in_interrupt() (irq_count())
> > #define in_serving_softirq() (softirq_count() & SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)
> > #define in_nmi() (preempt_count() & NMI_MASK)
> > +#define in_irq_or_nmi() (preempt_count() & (HARDIRQ_MASK | NMI_MASK))
> > #define in_task() (!(preempt_count() & \
> > (NMI_MASK | HARDIRQ_MASK | SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)))
> >
>
> No, that's horrible. Also, wth is this about? A memory allocator that
> needs in_nmi()? That sounds beyond broken.
It is the other way around. We want to exclude NMI and HARDIRQ from
using the per-cpu-pages (pcp) lists "order-0 cache" (they will
fall-through using the normal buddy allocator path).
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@redhat.com>,
Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@gmail.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@mellanox.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@mellanox.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, brouer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: in_irq_or_nmi()
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:59:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170329105928.609bc581@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170329081219.lto7t4fwmponokzh@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 10:12:19 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 09:58:17AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 05:15:00PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > > And I also verified it worked:
> > >
> > > 0.63 │ mov __preempt_count,%eax
> > > │ free_hot_cold_page():
> > > 1.25 │ test $0x1f0000,%eax
> > > │ ↓ jne 1e4
> > >
> > > And this simplification also made the compiler change this into a
> > > unlikely branch, which is a micro-optimization (that I will leave up to
> > > the compiler).
> >
> > Excellent! That said, I think we should define in_irq_or_nmi() in
> > preempt.h, rather than hiding it in the memory allocator. And since we're
> > doing that, we might as well make it look like the other definitions:
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/preempt.h b/include/linux/preempt.h
> > index 7eeceac52dea..af98c29abd9d 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/preempt.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/preempt.h
> > @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@
> > #define in_interrupt() (irq_count())
> > #define in_serving_softirq() (softirq_count() & SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)
> > #define in_nmi() (preempt_count() & NMI_MASK)
> > +#define in_irq_or_nmi() (preempt_count() & (HARDIRQ_MASK | NMI_MASK))
> > #define in_task() (!(preempt_count() & \
> > (NMI_MASK | HARDIRQ_MASK | SOFTIRQ_OFFSET)))
> >
>
> No, that's horrible. Also, wth is this about? A memory allocator that
> needs in_nmi()? That sounds beyond broken.
It is the other way around. We want to exclude NMI and HARDIRQ from
using the per-cpu-pages (pcp) lists "order-0 cache" (they will
fall-through using the normal buddy allocator path).
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-29 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-27 20:25 [merged] mm-page_alloc-only-use-per-cpu-allocator-for-irq-safe-requests.patch removed from -mm tree akpm
2017-03-01 13:48 ` Page allocator order-0 optimizations merged Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-01 17:36 ` Tariq Toukan
2017-03-01 17:36 ` Tariq Toukan
2017-03-22 17:39 ` Tariq Toukan
2017-03-22 17:39 ` Tariq Toukan
2017-03-22 23:40 ` Mel Gorman
2017-03-23 13:43 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-23 14:51 ` Mel Gorman
2017-03-26 8:21 ` Tariq Toukan
2017-03-26 10:17 ` Tariq Toukan
2017-03-27 7:32 ` Pankaj Gupta
2017-03-27 8:55 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-27 12:28 ` Mel Gorman
2017-03-27 12:39 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-27 13:32 ` Mel Gorman
2017-03-28 7:32 ` Tariq Toukan
2017-03-28 8:29 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-28 16:05 ` Tariq Toukan
2017-03-28 18:24 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-29 7:13 ` Tariq Toukan
2017-03-28 8:28 ` Pankaj Gupta
2017-03-27 14:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-03-27 14:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-03-27 15:15 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-27 16:58 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Matthew Wilcox
2017-03-27 16:58 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Matthew Wilcox
2017-03-27 16:58 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Matthew Wilcox
2017-03-29 8:12 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-29 8:12 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-29 8:12 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-29 8:59 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2017-03-29 8:59 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-29 9:19 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-29 9:19 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-29 9:19 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-29 18:12 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Matthew Wilcox
2017-03-29 18:12 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Matthew Wilcox
2017-03-29 19:11 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-29 19:11 ` in_irq_or_nmi() Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-29 19:44 ` in_irq_or_nmi() and RFC patch Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-29 19:44 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-30 6:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-30 6:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-30 7:12 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-30 7:12 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-30 7:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-30 7:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-03-30 9:46 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-30 9:46 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-30 13:04 ` Mel Gorman
2017-03-30 13:04 ` Mel Gorman
2017-03-30 15:07 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-03-30 15:07 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2017-04-03 12:05 ` Mel Gorman
2017-04-03 12:05 ` Mel Gorman
2017-04-05 8:53 ` Mel Gorman
2017-04-05 8:53 ` Mel Gorman
2017-04-10 14:31 ` Page allocator order-0 optimizations merged zhong jiang
2017-04-10 14:31 ` zhong jiang
2017-04-10 15:10 ` Mel Gorman
2017-04-11 1:54 ` zhong jiang
2017-04-11 1:54 ` zhong jiang
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=20170329105928.609bc581@redhat.com \
--to=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pagupta@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=saeedm@mellanox.com \
--cc=tariqt@mellanox.com \
--cc=ttoukan.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.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 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.