public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
Subject: [patch doh/9] mempool simplify alloc
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:53:52 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <425BC4E0.2030302@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <425BC262.1070500@yahoo.com.au>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 96 bytes --]

Whoops, this one should be 3/9. 3/9 should be 4/9, and so on.

-- 
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
quilt

[-- Attachment #2: mempool-simplify-alloc.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2381 bytes --]

Mempool is pretty clever. Looks too clever for its own good.
It shouldn't really know so much about MM internals.

- don't guess about what effective page reclaim might involve.

- don't randomly flush out all dirty data if some unlikely thing
  happens (alloc returns NULL). page reclaim can (sort of :P) handle
  it.

I think the main motivation is trying to avoid pool->lock at all
costs. However the first allocation is attempted with __GFP_WAIT
cleared, so it will be 'can_try_harder' if it hits the page allocator.
So if allocation still fails, then we can probably afford to hit the
pool->lock - and what's the alternative? Try page reclaim and hit
zone->lru_lock?

Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>

Index: linux-2.6/mm/mempool.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/mm/mempool.c	2005-04-12 22:47:02.000000000 +1000
+++ linux-2.6/mm/mempool.c	2005-04-12 22:47:02.000000000 +1000
@@ -198,36 +198,22 @@ void * mempool_alloc(mempool_t *pool, un
 	void *element;
 	unsigned long flags;
 	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
-	int gfp_nowait;
+	int gfp_temp;
 	
+	might_sleep_if(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT);
+
 	gfp_mask |= __GFP_MEMPOOL;
 	gfp_mask |= __GFP_NORETRY;	/* don't loop in __alloc_pages */
 	gfp_mask |= __GFP_NOWARN;	/* failures are OK */
-	gfp_nowait = gfp_mask & ~(__GFP_WAIT | __GFP_IO);
 
-	might_sleep_if(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT);
+	gfp_temp = gfp_mask & ~__GFP_WAIT;
+
 repeat_alloc:
-	element = pool->alloc(gfp_nowait, pool->pool_data);
+
+	element = pool->alloc(gfp_temp, pool->pool_data);
 	if (likely(element != NULL))
 		return element;
 
-	/*
-	 * If the pool is less than 50% full and we can perform effective
-	 * page reclaim then try harder to allocate an element.
-	 */
-	mb();
-	if ((gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) && (gfp_mask != gfp_nowait) &&
-				(pool->curr_nr <= pool->min_nr/2)) {
-		element = pool->alloc(gfp_mask, pool->pool_data);
-		if (likely(element != NULL))
-			return element;
-	}
-
-	/*
-	 * Kick the VM at this point.
-	 */
-	wakeup_bdflush(0);
-
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&pool->lock, flags);
 	if (likely(pool->curr_nr)) {
 		element = remove_element(pool);
@@ -240,6 +226,8 @@ repeat_alloc:
 	if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT))
 		return NULL;
 
+	/* Now start performing page reclaim */
+	gfp_temp = gfp_mask;
 	prepare_to_wait(&pool->wait, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
 	mb();
 	if (!pool->curr_nr)

      parent reply	other threads:[~2005-04-12 13:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-04-12 12:43 [patch 0/9] various (mainly mempool fixes and block layer improvements) Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:48 ` [patch 1/9] GFP_ZERO fix Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 19:47   ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-13  1:02     ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-14 10:59     ` Manfred Spraul
2005-04-12 12:48 ` [patch 2/9] mempool gfp flag Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 19:50   ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-13  1:03     ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:49 ` [patch 3/9] no PF_MEMALLOC tinkering Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 19:57   ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-13  1:13     ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:49 ` [patch 4/9] blk: no memory barrier Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:50 ` [patch 5/9] blk: branch hints Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:50 ` [patch 6/9] blk: unplug later Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 19:58   ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-13  1:32     ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-13 10:20       ` Jens Axboe
2005-04-12 12:51 ` [patch 7/9] blk: efficiency improvements Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:52 ` [patch 0/9] blk: reduce locking Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:53 ` Nick Piggin [this message]

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=425BC4E0.2030302@yahoo.com.au \
    --to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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