Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: CONFIG_NR_ZONES_EXTENDED

[Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>]

On 02/02/2016 06:42 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 22:19:14 -0800 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
>
>> ZONE_DEVICE (merged in 4.3) and ZONE_CMA (proposed) are examples of new
>> mm zones that are bumping up against the current maximum limit of 4
>> zones, i.e. 2 bits in page->flags.  When adding a zone this equation
>> still needs to be satisified:
>>
>>      SECTIONS_WIDTH + ZONES_WIDTH + NODES_SHIFT + LAST_CPUPID_SHIFT
>> 	  <= BITS_PER_LONG - NR_PAGEFLAGS
>>
>> ZONE_DEVICE currently tries to satisfy this equation by requiring that
>> ZONE_DMA be disabled, but this is untenable given generic kernels want
>> to support ZONE_DEVICE and ZONE_DMA simultaneously.  ZONE_CMA would like
>> to increase the amount of memory covered per section, but that limits
>> the minimum granularity at which consecutive memory ranges can be added
>> via devm_memremap_pages().
>>
>> The trade-off of what is acceptable to sacrifice depends heavily on the
>> platform.  For example, ZONE_CMA is targeted for 32-bit platforms where
>> page->flags is constrained, but those platforms likely do not care about
>> the minimum granularity of memory hotplug.  A big iron machine with 1024
>> numa nodes can likely sacrifice ZONE_DMA where a general purpose
>> distribution kernel can not.
>>
>> CONFIG_NR_ZONES_EXTENDED is a configuration symbol that gets selected
>> when the number of configured zones exceeds 4.  It documents the
>> configuration symbols and definitions that get modified when ZONES_WIDTH
>> is greater than 2.
>>
>> For now, it steals a bit from NODES_SHIFT.  Later on it can be used to
>> document the definitions that get modified when a 32-bit configuration
>> wants more zone bits.
>
> So if you want ZONE_DMA, you're limited to 512 NUMA nodes?
>
> That seems reasonable.

Sorry for the late reply, but it seems that with !SPARSEMEM, or with 
SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, reducing NUMA nodes isn't even necessary, because 
SECTIONS_WIDTH is zero (see the diagrams in linux/page-flags-layout.h). 
In my brief tests with 4.4 based kernel with SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP it seems 
that with 1024 NUMA nodes and 8192 CPU's, there's still 7 bits left 
(i.e. 6 with CONFIG_NR_ZONES_EXTENDED).

With the danger of becoming even more complex, could the limit also 
depend on CONFIG_SPARSEMEM/VMEMMAP to reflect that somehow?

Or does it even make sense to limit the Kconfig choice like this? Same 
reduction of bits could be achieved in multiple ways. Less CPU's means 
smaller LAST_CPUPID_SHIFT. NUMA_BALACING disabled means LAST_CPUPID_SHIFT=0.

What would be perhaps better is to (in case things don't fit) show what 
uses how many bits and what are the relevant config options to tune to 
make it fit?

--
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>