From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f199.google.com (mail-wr0-f199.google.com [209.85.128.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DFE86B0038 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 02:16:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-f199.google.com with SMTP id g7so9067822wrd.16 for ; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 23:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com. [148.163.158.5]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c41si6182416wrc.176.2017.04.06.23.16.02 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Apr 2017 23:16:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v3769kd8027681 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 02:16:01 -0400 Received: from e28smtp03.in.ibm.com (e28smtp03.in.ibm.com [125.16.236.3]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 29p3dc5m2v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 02:16:00 -0400 Received: from localhost by e28smtp03.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 11:45:27 +0530 Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (d28av02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.64]) by d28relay04.in.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id v376FPUp17891534 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 11:45:25 +0530 Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d28av02.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id v376FOeF011910 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 11:45:25 +0530 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [v2 5/5] mm: teach platforms not to zero struct pages memory In-Reply-To: <20170327060032.GB5092@osiris> References: <1490383192-981017-1-git-send-email-pasha.tatashin@oracle.com> <1490383192-981017-6-git-send-email-pasha.tatashin@oracle.com> <20170327060032.GB5092@osiris> Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 11:45:23 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <87bms8rbes.fsf@skywalker.in.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Heiko Carstens , Pavel Tatashin Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, davem@davemloft.net, willy@infradead.org Heiko Carstens writes: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 03:19:52PM -0400, Pavel Tatashin wrote: >> If we are using deferred struct page initialization feature, most of >> "struct page"es are getting initialized after other CPUs are started, and >> hence we are benefiting from doing this job in parallel. However, we are >> still zeroing all the memory that is allocated for "struct pages" using the >> boot CPU. This patch solves this problem, by deferring zeroing "struct >> pages" to only when they are initialized. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pavel Tatashin >> Reviewed-by: Shannon Nelson >> --- >> arch/powerpc/mm/init_64.c | 2 +- >> arch/s390/mm/vmem.c | 2 +- >> arch/sparc/mm/init_64.c | 2 +- >> arch/x86/mm/init_64.c | 2 +- >> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/init_64.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/init_64.c >> index eb4c270..24faf2d 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/init_64.c >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/init_64.c >> @@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ int __meminit vmemmap_populate(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, int node) >> if (vmemmap_populated(start, page_size)) >> continue; >> >> - p = vmemmap_alloc_block(page_size, node, true); >> + p = vmemmap_alloc_block(page_size, node, VMEMMAP_ZERO); >> if (!p) >> return -ENOMEM; >> >> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c b/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c >> index 9c75214..ffe9ba1 100644 >> --- a/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c >> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c >> @@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ int __meminit vmemmap_populate(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, int node) >> void *new_page; >> >> new_page = vmemmap_alloc_block(PMD_SIZE, node, >> - true); >> + VMEMMAP_ZERO); >> if (!new_page) >> goto out; >> pmd_val(*pm_dir) = __pa(new_page) | sgt_prot; > > s390 has two call sites that need to be converted, like you did in one of > your previous patches. The same seems to be true for powerpc, unless there > is a reason to not convert them? > vmemmap_list_alloc is not really struct page allocation right ? We are just allocating memory to be used as vmemmmap_backing. But considering we are updating all the three elements of the sturct, we can avoid that memset . But instead of VMEMMAP_ZERO we can just pass false in that case ? -aneesh -- 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: email@kvack.org