All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: update pcp->count inside
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 09:56:13 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180227015613.GA9141@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1802261345550.135844@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:48:14PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Aaron Lu wrote:
> 
> > Matthew Wilcox found that all callers of free_pcppages_bulk() currently
> > update pcp->count immediately after so it's natural to do it inside
> > free_pcppages_bulk().
> > 
> > No functionality or performance change is expected from this patch.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/page_alloc.c | 10 +++-------
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > index cb416723538f..3154859cccd6 100644
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -1117,6 +1117,7 @@ static void free_pcppages_bulk(struct zone *zone, int count,
> >  	int batch_free = 0;
> >  	bool isolated_pageblocks;
> >  
> > +	pcp->count -= count;
> >  	spin_lock(&zone->lock);
> >  	isolated_pageblocks = has_isolate_pageblock(zone);
> >  
> 
> Why modify pcp->count before the pages have actually been freed?

When count is still count and not zero after pages have actually been
freed :-)

> 
> I doubt that it matters too much, but at least /proc/zoneinfo uses 
> zone->lock.  I think it should be done after the lock is dropped.

Agree that it looks a bit weird to do it beforehand and I just want to
avoid adding one more local variable here.

pcp->count is not protected by zone->lock though so even we do it after
dropping the lock, it could still happen that zoneinfo shows a wrong
value of pcp->count while it should be zero(this isn't a problem since
zoneinfo doesn't need to be precise).

Anyway, I'll follow your suggestion here to avoid confusion.
 
> Otherwise, looks good.

Thanks for taking a look at this.

--
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: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@intel.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: update pcp->count inside
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 09:56:13 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180227015613.GA9141@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1802261345550.135844@chino.kir.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 01:48:14PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2018, Aaron Lu wrote:
> 
> > Matthew Wilcox found that all callers of free_pcppages_bulk() currently
> > update pcp->count immediately after so it's natural to do it inside
> > free_pcppages_bulk().
> > 
> > No functionality or performance change is expected from this patch.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/page_alloc.c | 10 +++-------
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > index cb416723538f..3154859cccd6 100644
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -1117,6 +1117,7 @@ static void free_pcppages_bulk(struct zone *zone, int count,
> >  	int batch_free = 0;
> >  	bool isolated_pageblocks;
> >  
> > +	pcp->count -= count;
> >  	spin_lock(&zone->lock);
> >  	isolated_pageblocks = has_isolate_pageblock(zone);
> >  
> 
> Why modify pcp->count before the pages have actually been freed?

When count is still count and not zero after pages have actually been
freed :-)

> 
> I doubt that it matters too much, but at least /proc/zoneinfo uses 
> zone->lock.  I think it should be done after the lock is dropped.

Agree that it looks a bit weird to do it beforehand and I just want to
avoid adding one more local variable here.

pcp->count is not protected by zone->lock though so even we do it after
dropping the lock, it could still happen that zoneinfo shows a wrong
value of pcp->count while it should be zero(this isn't a problem since
zoneinfo doesn't need to be precise).

Anyway, I'll follow your suggestion here to avoid confusion.
 
> Otherwise, looks good.

Thanks for taking a look at this.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-27  1:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-26 13:53 [PATCH v3 0/3] mm: improve zone->lock scalability Aaron Lu
2018-02-26 13:53 ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-26 13:53 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: update pcp->count inside Aaron Lu
2018-02-26 13:53   ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-26 21:48   ` David Rientjes
2018-02-26 21:48     ` David Rientjes
2018-02-27  1:56     ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2018-02-27  1:56       ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-27  3:12       ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-27  3:12         ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-26 13:53 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: do not hold lock when picking pages to free Aaron Lu
2018-02-26 13:53   ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-26 21:53   ` David Rientjes
2018-02-26 21:53     ` David Rientjes
2018-02-27  2:00     ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-27  2:00       ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-27  3:17       ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-27  3:17         ` Aaron Lu
2018-02-26 13:53 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] mm/free_pcppages_bulk: prefetch buddy while not holding lock Aaron Lu
2018-02-26 13:53   ` Aaron Lu

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=20180227015613.GA9141@intel.com \
    --to=aaron.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=kemi.wang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.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.