From: Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Cc: Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, rientjes@google.com, liuj97@gmail.com,
len.brown@intel.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org,
cl@linux.com, minchan.kim@gmail.com,
kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com,
wujianguo@huawei.com, hpa@zytor.com, linfeng@cn.fujitsu.com,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, mgorman@suse.de, yinghai@kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, cmetcalf@tilera.com,
sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/14] memory-hotplug: try to offline the memory twice to avoid dependence
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 11:07:23 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5111C8EB.6090805@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50ED8834.1090804@parallels.com>
Hi Glauber, all,
An old thing I want to discuss with you. :)
On 01/09/2013 11:09 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
>>>> memory can't be offlined when CONFIG_MEMCG is selected.
>>>> For example: there is a memory device on node 1. The address range
>>>> is [1G, 1.5G). You will find 4 new directories memory8, memory9, memory10,
>>>> and memory11 under the directory /sys/devices/system/memory/.
>>>>
>>>> If CONFIG_MEMCG is selected, we will allocate memory to store page cgroup
>>>> when we online pages. When we online memory8, the memory stored page cgroup
>>>> is not provided by this memory device. But when we online memory9, the memory
>>>> stored page cgroup may be provided by memory8. So we can't offline memory8
>>>> now. We should offline the memory in the reversed order.
>>>>
>>>> When the memory device is hotremoved, we will auto offline memory provided
>>>> by this memory device. But we don't know which memory is onlined first, so
>>>> offlining memory may fail. In such case, iterate twice to offline the memory.
>>>> 1st iterate: offline every non primary memory block.
>>>> 2nd iterate: offline primary (i.e. first added) memory block.
>>>>
>>>> This idea is suggested by KOSAKI Motohiro.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang<wency@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>>
>>> Maybe there is something here that I am missing - I admit that I came
>>> late to this one, but this really sounds like a very ugly hack, that
>>> really has no place in here.
>>>
>>> Retrying, of course, may make sense, if we have reasonable belief that
>>> we may now succeed. If this is the case, you need to document - in the
>>> code - while is that.
>>>
>>> The memcg argument, however, doesn't really cut it. Why can't we make
>>> all page_cgroup allocations local to the node they are describing? If
>>> memcg is the culprit here, we should fix it, and not retry. If there is
>>> still any benefit in retrying, then we retry being very specific about why.
>>
>> We try to make all page_cgroup allocations local to the node they are describing
>> now. If the memory is the first memory onlined in this node, we will allocate
>> it from the other node.
>>
>> For example, node1 has 4 memory blocks: 8-11, and we online it from 8 to 11
>> 1. memory block 8, page_cgroup allocations are in the other nodes
>> 2. memory block 9, page_cgroup allocations are in memory block 8
>>
>> So we should offline memory block 9 first. But we don't know in which order
>> the user online the memory block.
>>
>> I think we can modify memcg like this:
>> allocate the memory from the memory block they are describing
>>
>> I am not sure it is OK to do so.
>
> I don't see a reason why not.
>
> You would have to tweak a bit the lookup function for page_cgroup, but
> assuming you will always have the pfns and limits, it should be easy to do.
>
> I think the only tricky part is that today we have a single
> node_page_cgroup, and we would of course have to have one per memory
> block. My assumption is that the number of memory blocks is limited and
> likely not very big. So even a static array would do.
>
About the idea "allocate the memory from the memory block they are
describing",
online_pages()
|-->memory_notify(MEM_GOING_ONLINE, &arg) ----------- memory of this
section is not in buddy yet.
|-->page_cgroup_callback()
|-->online_page_cgroup()
|-->init_section_page_cgroup()
|-->alloc_page_cgroup() --------- allocate
page_cgroup from buddy system.
When onlining pages, we allocate page_cgroup from buddy. And the being
onlined pages are not in
buddy yet. I think we can reserve some memory in the section for
page_cgroup, and return all the
rest to the buddy.
But when the system is booting,
start_kernel()
|-->setup_arch()
|-->mm_init()
| |-->mem_init()
| |-->numa_free_all_bootmem() -------------- all the pages are
in buddy system.
|-->page_cgroup_init()
|-->init_section_page_cgroup()
|-->alloc_page_cgroup() ------------------ I don't know how
to reserve memory in each section.
So any idea about how to deal with it when the system is booting please?
And one more question, a memory section is 128MB in Linux. If we reserve
part of the them for page_cgroup,
then anyone who wants to allocate a contiguous memory larger than 128MB,
it will fail, right ?
Is it OK ?
Thanks. :)
--
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:[~2013-02-06 3:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-24 12:09 [PATCH v5 00/14] memory-hotplug: hot-remove physical memory Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 01/14] memory-hotplug: try to offline the memory twice to avoid dependence Tang Chen
2012-12-25 8:35 ` Glauber Costa
2012-12-30 5:58 ` Wen Congyang
2013-01-09 15:09 ` Glauber Costa
2013-01-10 1:38 ` Tang Chen
2013-02-06 3:07 ` Tang Chen [this message]
2013-02-06 9:17 ` Tang Chen
2013-02-06 10:10 ` Tang Chen
2013-02-06 14:24 ` Glauber Costa
2013-02-07 7:56 ` Tang Chen
2012-12-26 3:02 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-12-30 5:49 ` Wen Congyang
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 02/14] memory-hotplug: check whether all memory blocks are offlined or not when removing memory Tang Chen
2012-12-26 3:10 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-12-27 3:10 ` Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 03/14] memory-hotplug: remove redundant codes Tang Chen
2012-12-26 3:20 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-12-27 3:09 ` Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 04/14] memory-hotplug: remove /sys/firmware/memmap/X sysfs Tang Chen
2012-12-26 3:30 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-12-27 3:09 ` Tang Chen
2013-01-02 14:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 05/14] memory-hotplug: introduce new function arch_remove_memory() for removing page table depends on architecture Tang Chen
2012-12-26 3:37 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 06/14] memory-hotplug: implement register_page_bootmem_info_section of sparse-vmemmap Tang Chen
2012-12-25 8:09 ` Jianguo Wu
2012-12-26 3:21 ` Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 07/14] memory-hotplug: move pgdat_resize_lock into sparse_remove_one_section() Tang Chen
2012-12-26 3:47 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-12-26 6:20 ` Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 08/14] memory-hotplug: Common APIs to support page tables hot-remove Tang Chen
2012-12-25 8:17 ` Jianguo Wu
2012-12-26 2:49 ` Tang Chen
2012-12-26 3:11 ` Tang Chen
2012-12-26 3:19 ` Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 09/14] memory-hotplug: remove page table of x86_64 architecture Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 10/14] memory-hotplug: remove memmap of sparse-vmemmap Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 11/14] memory-hotplug: Integrated __remove_section() of CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 12/14] memory-hotplug: memory_hotplug: clear zone when removing the memory Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 13/14] memory-hotplug: remove sysfs file of node Tang Chen
2012-12-24 12:09 ` [PATCH v5 14/14] memory-hotplug: free node_data when a node is offlined Tang Chen
2012-12-26 3:55 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-12-27 12:16 ` Wen Congyang
2012-12-28 0:28 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2012-12-30 6:02 ` Wen Congyang
2013-01-07 5:30 ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
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=5111C8EB.6090805@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
--cc=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linfeng@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=liuj97@gmail.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wency@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=wujianguo@huawei.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--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).