From: Jaegeuk Hanse <jaegeuk.hanse@gmail.com>
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>,
wency@cn.fujitsu.com, linfeng@cn.fujitsu.com, rob@landley.net,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, jiang.liu@huawei.com,
kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, minchan.kim@gmail.com,
mgorman@suse.de, rientjes@google.com, yinghai@kernel.org,
rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add movablecore_map boot option.
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:25:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50AB6899.3060609@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50AB646E.7040009@jp.fujitsu.com>
On 11/20/2012 07:07 PM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> 2012/11/20 5:53, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 22:27:21 +0800
>> Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This patchset provide a boot option for user to specify ZONE_MOVABLE
>>> memory
>>> map for each node in the system.
>>>
>>> movablecore_map=nn[KMG]@ss[KMG]
>>>
>>> This option make sure memory range from ss to ss+nn is movable memory.
>>> 1) If the range is involved in a single node, then from ss to the
>>> end of
>>> the node will be ZONE_MOVABLE.
>>> 2) If the range covers two or more nodes, then from ss to the end of
>>> the node will be ZONE_MOVABLE, and all the other nodes will only
>>> have ZONE_MOVABLE.
>>> 3) If no range is in the node, then the node will have no ZONE_MOVABLE
>>> unless kernelcore or movablecore is specified.
>>> 4) This option could be specified at most MAX_NUMNODES times.
>>> 5) If kernelcore or movablecore is also specified, movablecore_map
>>> will have
>>> higher priority to be satisfied.
>>> 6) This option has no conflict with memmap option.
>>
>> This doesn't describe the problem which the patchset solves. I can
>> kinda see where it's coming from, but it would be nice to have it all
>> spelled out, please.
>>
>
>> - What is wrong with the kernel as it stands?
>
> If we hot remove a memroy, the memory cannot have kernel memory,
> because Linux cannot migrate kernel memory currently. Therefore,
> we have to guarantee that the hot removed memory has only movable
> memoroy.
>
> Linux has two boot options, kernelcore= and movablecore=, for
> creating movable memory. These boot options can specify the amount
> of memory use as kernel or movable memory. Using them, we can
> create ZONE_MOVABLE which has only movable memory.
>
> But it does not fulfill a requirement of memory hot remove, because
> even if we specify the boot options, movable memory is distributed
> in each node evenly. So when we want to hot remove memory which
> memory range is 0x80000000-0c0000000, we have no way to specify
> the memory as movable memory.
Could you explain why can't specify the memory as movable memory in this
case?
>
> So we proposed a new feature which specifies memory range to use as
> movable memory.
>
>> - What are the possible ways of solving this?
>
> I thought 2 ways to specify movable memory.
> 1. use firmware information
> 2. use boot option
>
> 1. use firmware information
> According to ACPI spec 5.0, SRAT table has memory affinity structure
> and the structure has Hot Pluggable Filed. See "5.2.16.2 Memory
> Affinity Structure". If we use the information, we might be able to
> specify movable memory by firmware. For example, if Hot Pluggable
> Filed is enabled, Linux sets the memory as movable memory.
>
> 2. use boot option
> This is our proposal. New boot option can specify memory range to use
> as movable memory.
>
>> - Describe the chosen way, explain why it is superior to alternatives
>
> We chose second way, because if we use first way, users cannot change
> memory range to use as movable memory easily. We think if we create
> movable memory, performance regression may occur by NUMA. In this case,
Could you explain why regression occur in details?
> user can turn off the feature easily if we prepare the boot option.
> And if we prepare the boot optino, the user can select which memory
> to use as movable memory easily.
>
> Thanks,
> Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>>
>> The amount of manual system configuration in this proposal looks quite
>> high. Adding kernel boot parameters really is a last resort. Why was
>> it unavoidable here?
>>
>
>
> --
> 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>
--
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:[~2012-11-20 11:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-19 14:27 [PATCH 0/5] Add movablecore_map boot option Tang Chen
2012-11-19 14:27 ` [PATCH 1/5] x86: Get pg_data_t's memory from other node Tang Chen
2012-11-21 5:46 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2012-11-21 5:58 ` Tang Chen
2012-11-21 6:06 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2012-11-19 14:27 ` [PATCH 2/5] page_alloc: Add movablecore_map boot option Tang Chen
2012-11-21 5:44 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2012-11-21 6:00 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2012-11-19 14:27 ` [PATCH 3/5] page_alloc: Sanitize zone_movable_pfn Tang Chen
2012-11-19 14:27 ` [PATCH 4/5] page_alloc: Make movablecore_map has higher priority Tang Chen
2012-11-19 14:27 ` [PATCH 5/5] page_alloc: Bootmem limit with movablecore_map Tang Chen
2012-11-19 20:53 ` [PATCH 0/5] Add movablecore_map boot option Andrew Morton
2012-11-20 1:29 ` Jiang Liu
2012-11-20 11:07 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2012-11-20 11:25 ` Jaegeuk Hanse [this message]
2012-11-21 0:36 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
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=50AB6899.3060609@gmail.com \
--to=jaegeuk.hanse@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=jiang.liu@huawei.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linfeng@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rob@landley.net \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=wency@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.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 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).