From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm/mm_init: use deferred_init_memmap_chunk() in deferred_grow_zone()
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 13:54:46 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aKRX9iIe8h9fFi9v@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250819095223.ckjdsii4gc6u4nec@master>
On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 09:52:23AM +0000, Wei Yang wrote:
> Hi, Mike
>
> After going through the code again, I have some trivial thoughts to discuss
> with you. If not right, please let me know.
>
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 09:46:12AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> [...]
> > bool __init deferred_grow_zone(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order)
> > {
> >- unsigned long nr_pages_needed = ALIGN(1 << order, PAGES_PER_SECTION);
> >+ unsigned long nr_pages_needed = SECTION_ALIGN_UP(1 << order);
> > pg_data_t *pgdat = zone->zone_pgdat;
> > unsigned long first_deferred_pfn = pgdat->first_deferred_pfn;
> > unsigned long spfn, epfn, flags;
> > unsigned long nr_pages = 0;
> >- u64 i = 0;
> >
> > /* Only the last zone may have deferred pages */
> > if (zone_end_pfn(zone) != pgdat_end_pfn(pgdat))
> >@@ -2262,37 +2272,26 @@ bool __init deferred_grow_zone(struct zone *zone, unsigned int order)
> > return true;
> > }
>
> In the file above this line, there is a compare between first_deferred_pfn and
> its original value after grab pgdat_resize_lock.
Do you mean this one:
if (first_deferred_pfn != pgdat->first_deferred_pfn) {
pgdat_resize_unlock(pgdat, &flags);
return true;
}
> I am thinking to compare first_deferred_pfn with ULONG_MAX, as it compared in
> deferred_init_memmap(). This indicate this zone has already been initialized
> totally.
It may be another CPU ran deferred_grow_zone() and won the race for resize
lock. Then pgdat->first_deferred_pfn will be larger than
first_deferred_pfn, but still not entire zone would be initialized.
> Current code guard this by spfn < zone_end_pfn(zone). Maybe a check ahead
> would be more clear?
Not sure I follow you here. The check that we don't pass zone_end_pfn is
inside the loop for every section we initialize.
> >
> >- /* If the zone is empty somebody else may have cleared out the zone */
> >- if (!deferred_init_mem_pfn_range_in_zone(&i, zone, &spfn, &epfn,
> >- first_deferred_pfn)) {
> >- pgdat->first_deferred_pfn = ULONG_MAX;
> >- pgdat_resize_unlock(pgdat, &flags);
> >- /* Retry only once. */
> >- return first_deferred_pfn != ULONG_MAX;
> >+ /*
> >+ * Initialize at least nr_pages_needed in section chunks.
> >+ * If a section has less free memory than nr_pages_needed, the next
> >+ * section will be also initalized.
> >+ * Note, that it still does not guarantee that allocation of order can
> >+ * be satisfied if the sections are fragmented because of memblock
> >+ * allocations.
> >+ */
> >+ for (spfn = first_deferred_pfn, epfn = SECTION_ALIGN_UP(spfn + 1);
>
> I am expecting first_deferred_pfn is section aligned. So epfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION
> is fine?
It should be, but I'd prefer to be on the safe side and keep it this way.
> Maybe I missed something.
>
> >+ nr_pages < nr_pages_needed && spfn < zone_end_pfn(zone);
> >+ spfn = epfn, epfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
> >+ nr_pages += deferred_init_memmap_chunk(spfn, epfn, zone);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> >- * Initialize and free pages in MAX_PAGE_ORDER sized increments so
> >- * that we can avoid introducing any issues with the buddy
> >- * allocator.
> >+ * There were no pages to initialize and free which means the zone's
> >+ * memory map is completely initialized.
> > */
> >- while (spfn < epfn) {
> >- /* update our first deferred PFN for this section */
> >- first_deferred_pfn = spfn;
> >-
> >- nr_pages += deferred_init_maxorder(&i, zone, &spfn, &epfn);
> >- touch_nmi_watchdog();
> >-
> >- /* We should only stop along section boundaries */
> >- if ((first_deferred_pfn ^ spfn) < PAGES_PER_SECTION)
> >- continue;
> >-
> >- /* If our quota has been met we can stop here */
> >- if (nr_pages >= nr_pages_needed)
> >- break;
> >- }
> >+ pgdat->first_deferred_pfn = nr_pages ? spfn : ULONG_MAX;
>
> If we come here because spfn >= zone_end_pfn(zone), first_deferred_pfn is left
> a "valid" value and deferred_init_memmap() will try to do its job. But
> actually nothing left to initialize.
We anyway run a thread for each node with memory. In the very unlikely case
we've completely initialized a deferred zone that thread will finish much
faster :)
> For this case, I suggest to set it ULONG_MAX too. But this is really corner
> case.
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-19 10:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-18 6:46 [PATCH 0/4] mm/mm_init: simplify deferred init of struct pages Mike Rapoport
2025-08-18 6:46 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm/mm_init: use deferred_init_memmap_chunk() in deferred_grow_zone() Mike Rapoport
2025-08-19 7:44 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-19 9:52 ` Wei Yang
2025-08-19 10:54 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2025-08-19 23:51 ` Wei Yang
2025-08-20 9:20 ` Mike Rapoport
2025-08-20 12:42 ` Wei Yang
2025-08-18 6:46 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm/mm_init: deferred_init_memmap: use a job per zone Mike Rapoport
2025-08-19 7:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-18 6:46 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm/mm_init: drop deferred_init_maxorder() Mike Rapoport
2025-08-19 7:54 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-19 9:22 ` Wei Yang
2025-08-19 10:39 ` Mike Rapoport
2025-08-19 12:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-18 6:46 ` [PATCH 4/4] memblock: drop for_each_free_mem_pfn_range_in_zone_from() Mike Rapoport
2025-08-19 7:39 ` [PATCH 0/4] mm/mm_init: simplify deferred init of struct pages Wei Yang
2025-08-19 10:41 ` Mike Rapoport
2025-08-22 5:54 ` Mike Rapoport
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=aKRX9iIe8h9fFi9v@kernel.org \
--to=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
/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).