From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: Vasily Averin <vvs@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: use kvzalloc for swap_info_struct allocation
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:10:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181105061016.GA4502@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f702278c-4e2f-a7fd-0e0a-150284ec8cc1@virtuozzo.com>
On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 07:59:13AM +0300, Vasily Averin wrote:
>
>
> On 11/5/18 3:50 AM, Huang, Ying wrote:
> > Vasily Averin <vvs@virtuozzo.com> writes:
> >
> >> commit a2468cc9bfdf ("swap: choose swap device according to numa node")
> >> increased size of swap_info_struct up to 44 Kbytes, now it requires
> >> 4th order page.
> >
> > Why swap_info_struct could be so large? Because MAX_NUMNODES could be
> > thousands so that 'avail_lists' field could be tens KB? If so, I think
> > it's fair to use kvzalloc(). Can you add one line comment? Because
> > struct swap_info_struct is quite small in default configuration.
>
> I was incorrect not 44Kb but 40kb should be here.
> We have found CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT=10 in new RHEL7 update 6 kernel,
> default ubuntu kernels have the same setting too.
>
> crash> struct swap_info_struct -o
> struct swap_info_struct {
> [0] unsigned long flags;
> [8] short prio;
> ...
> [140] spinlock_t lock;
> [144] struct plist_node list;
> [184] struct plist_node avail_lists[1024]; <<<< here
So every 'struct plist_node' takes 40 bytes and 1024 of them take a
total of 40960 bytes, which is 10 pages and need an order-4 page to host
them. It looks a little too much, especially consider most of the space
will left be unused since most systems have nodes <= 4. I didn't realize
this problem when developing this patch, thanks for pointing this out.
I think using kvzalloc() as is done by your patch is better here as it
can avoid possible failure of swapon.
Acked-by: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
BTW, for systems with few swap devices this may not be a big deal, but
according to your description, your workload will create a lot of swap
devices and each of them will likely cause an order-4 unmovable pages
allocated(when kvzalloc() doesn't fallback). I was thinking maybe we
should convert avail_lists to a pointer in swap_info_struct and use
vzalloc() for it.
Thanks,
Aaron
> [41144] struct swap_cluster_info *cluster_info;
> [41152] struct swap_cluster_list free_clusters;
> ...
> [41224] spinlock_t cont_lock;
> }
> SIZE: 41232
>
> struct swap_info_struct {
> ...
> RH_KABI_EXTEND(struct plist_node avail_lists[MAX_NUMNODES]) /* entry in swap_avail_head */
> ...
> }
>
> #define MAX_NUMNODES (1 << NODES_SHIFT)
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT
> #define NODES_SHIFT CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT
> #else
> #define NODES_SHIFT 0
> #endif
>
> /boot/config-4.15.0-38-generic:CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT=10
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-05 6:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-04 22:13 [PATCH 1/2] mm: use kvzalloc for swap_info_struct allocation Vasily Averin
2018-11-05 0:50 ` Huang, Ying
2018-11-05 4:59 ` Vasily Averin
2018-11-05 5:16 ` Huang, Ying
2018-11-05 6:10 ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2018-11-05 11:17 ` [PATCH v2] " Vasily Averin
2018-11-05 14:11 ` Michal Hocko
2018-11-05 14:27 ` 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=20181105061016.GA4502@intel.com \
--to=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=vvs@virtuozzo.com \
--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 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).