From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, fengguang.wu@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz, nigel@tuxonice.net,
rientjes@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] PM/Hibernate: Rework shrinking of memory
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 12:34:09 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090513123409.302f4307.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200905131039.26778.rjw@sisk.pl>
On Wed, 13 May 2009 10:39:25 +0200
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
>
> Rework swsusp_shrink_memory() so that it calls shrink_all_memory()
> just once to make some room for the image and then allocates memory
> to apply more pressure to the memory management subsystem, if
> necessary.
>
> Unfortunately, we don't seem to be able to drop shrink_all_memory()
> entirely just yet, because that would lead to huge performance
> regressions in some test cases.
>
Isn't this a somewhat large problem? The main point (I thought) was
to remove shrink_all_memory(). Instead, we're retaining it and adding
even more stuff?
> +/**
> + * compute_fraction - Compute approximate fraction x * (a/b)
> + * @x: Number to multiply.
> + * @numerator: Numerator of the fraction (a).
> + * @denominator: Denominator of the fraction (b).
> *
> - * Notice: all userland should be stopped before it is called, or
> - * livelock is possible.
> + * Compute an approximate value of the expression x * (a/b), where a is less
> + * than b, all x, a, b are unsigned longs and x * a may be greater than the
> + * maximum unsigned long.
> */
> +static unsigned long compute_fraction(
> + unsigned long x, unsigned long numerator, unsigned long denominator)
I can't say I'm a great fan of the code layout here.
static unsigned long compute_fraction(unsigned long x, unsigned long numerator, unsigned long denominator)
or
static unsigned long compute_fraction(unsigned long x, unsigned long numerator,
unsigned long denominator)
would be more typical.
> +{
> + unsigned long ratio = (numerator << FRACTION_SHIFT) / denominator;
>
> -#define SHRINK_BITE 10000
> -static inline unsigned long __shrink_memory(long tmp)
> + x *= ratio;
> + return x >> FRACTION_SHIFT;
> +}
Strange function. Would it not be simpler/clearer to do it with 64-bit
scalars, multiplication and do_div()?
> +static unsigned long highmem_size(
> + unsigned long size, unsigned long highmem, unsigned long count)
> +{
> + return highmem > count / 2 ?
> + compute_fraction(size, highmem, count) :
> + size - compute_fraction(size, count - highmem, count);
> +}
This would be considerably easier to follow if we know what the three
arguments represent. Amount of memory? In what units? `count' of
what?
The `count/2' thing there is quite mysterious.
<does some reverse-engineering>
OK, `count' is "the number of pageframes we can use". (I don't think I
helped myself a lot there). But what's up with that divde-by-two?
<considers poking at callers to work out what `size' is>
<gives up>
Is this code as clear as we can possibly make it??
> +#else
> +static inline unsigned long preallocate_image_highmem(unsigned long nr_pages)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned long highmem_size(
> + unsigned long size, unsigned long highmem, unsigned long count)
> {
> - if (tmp > SHRINK_BITE)
> - tmp = SHRINK_BITE;
> - return shrink_all_memory(tmp);
> + return 0;
> }
> +#endif /* CONFIG_HIGHMEM */
>
> +/**
> + * swsusp_shrink_memory - Make the kernel release as much memory as needed
> + *
> + * To create a hibernation image it is necessary to make a copy of every page
> + * frame in use. We also need a number of page frames to be free during
> + * hibernation for allocations made while saving the image and for device
> + * drivers, in case they need to allocate memory from their hibernation
> + * callbacks (these two numbers are given by PAGES_FOR_IO and SPARE_PAGES,
> + * respectively, both of which are rough estimates). To make this happen, we
> + * compute the total number of available page frames and allocate at least
> + *
> + * ([page frames total] + PAGES_FOR_IO + [metadata pages]) / 2 + 2 * SPARE_PAGES
> + *
> + * of them, which corresponds to the maximum size of a hibernation image.
> + *
> + * If image_size is set below the number following from the above formula,
> + * the preallocation of memory is continued until the total number of saveable
> + * pages in the system is below the requested image size or it is impossible to
> + * allocate more memory, whichever happens first.
> + */
OK, that helps.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-13 19:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200905070040.08561.rjw@sisk.pl>
2009-05-07 21:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/5] PM/Hibernate: Rework memory shrinking (rev. 2) Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-07 21:50 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/5] mm: Introduce __GFP_NO_OOM_KILL Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-07 22:24 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM/Freezer: Disable OOM killer when tasks are frozen (was: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] mm: Introduce __GFP_NO_OOM_KILL) Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-07 21:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/5] PM/Suspend: Do not shrink memory before suspend Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-08 8:52 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-07 21:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/5] PM/Hibernate: Move memory shrinking to snapshot.c (rev. 2) Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-08 8:53 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-07 21:53 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/5] PM/Hibernate: Rework shrinking of memory Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-07 21:55 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/5] PM/Hibernate: Do not release preallocated memory unnecessarily Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-10 13:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/6] PM/Hibernate: Rework memory shrinking (rev. 3) Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-10 13:50 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/6] mm: Introduce __GFP_NO_OOM_KILL Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-11 20:12 ` David Rientjes
2009-05-11 22:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-11 22:33 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-11 23:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-10 13:50 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/6] PM/Suspend: Do not shrink memory before suspend Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-10 13:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/6] PM/Hibernate: Move memory shrinking to snapshot.c (rev. 2) Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-10 13:53 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/6] PM/Hibernate: Rework shrinking of memory Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-10 13:57 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/6] PM/Hibernate: Do not release preallocated memory unnecessarily Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-10 19:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-10 14:12 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/6] PM/Hibernate: Estimate hard core working set size Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-10 19:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-13 8:32 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/6] PM/Hibernate: Rework memory shrinking (rev. 4) Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-13 8:34 ` [PATCH 1/6] PM/Suspend: Do not shrink memory before suspend Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-13 8:35 ` [PATCH 2/6] PM/Hibernate: Move memory shrinking to snapshot.c (rev. 2) Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-13 8:37 ` [PATCH 3/6] mm, PM/Freezer: Disable OOM killer when tasks are frozen Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-13 9:19 ` Pavel Machek
2009-05-13 22:35 ` David Rientjes
2009-05-13 22:47 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-13 23:01 ` David Rientjes
2009-05-13 8:39 ` [PATCH 4/6] PM/Hibernate: Rework shrinking of memory Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-13 19:34 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-05-13 20:55 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-13 21:16 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-13 21:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-14 9:40 ` Pavel Machek
2009-05-14 17:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-15 13:09 ` Pavel Machek
2009-05-14 18:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-13 8:40 ` [PATCH 5/6] PM/Hibernate: Do not release preallocated memory unnecessarily (rev. 2) Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-14 11:09 ` Pavel Machek
2009-05-14 17:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-15 13:11 ` Pavel Machek
2009-05-15 14:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-13 8:42 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/6] PM/Hibernate: Do not try to allocate too much memory too hard Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-14 11:14 ` Pavel Machek
2009-05-14 17:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-15 13:14 ` Pavel Machek
2009-05-15 14:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-17 12:06 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-17 12:55 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-17 14:07 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-17 16:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-18 8:32 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-17 21:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-18 8:56 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-18 17:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-05-19 0:47 ` Wu Fengguang
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=20090513123409.302f4307.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=nigel@tuxonice.net \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/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).