linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>,
	Richard Chang <richardycc@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] mm/page_isolation: make page isolation a standalone bit.
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 14:11:44 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e9b85836-b4d9-4678-a59b-dbaf916fa1c5@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B21E6F5D-C824-4BB8-974D-A1BA313880EB@nvidia.com>

On 21.05.25 14:00, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 21 May 2025, at 7:57, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> 
>> On 21.05.25 13:16, Zi Yan wrote:
>>> On 19 May 2025, at 12:42, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_ISOLATION
>>>>>>> +	if (flags & PB_migrate_isolate_bit)
>>>>>>> +		return MIGRATE_ISOLATE;
>>>>>>> +#endif
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you call get_pfnblock_flags_mask() with MIGRATETYPE_MASK, how could you ever get PB_migrate_isolate_bit?
>>>>>
>>>>> MIGRATETYPE_MASK is ((BIT(PB_migratetype_bits) - 1) | PB_migrate_isolate_bit),
>>>>> so it gets PB_migrate_isolate_bit.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oh ... that's confusing.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think what we should do is
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Rename get_pfnblock_flags_mask() to get_pfnblock_flags()
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Remove the mask parameter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) Perform the masking in all callers.
>>>>>
>>>>> get_pfnblock_flags_mask() is also used by get_pageblock_skip() to
>>>>> get PB_migrate_skip. I do not think we want to include PB_migrate_skip
>>>>> in the mask to confuse readers.
>>>>
>>>> The masking will be handled in the caller.
>>>>
>>>> So get_pageblock_skip() would essentially do a
>>>>
>>>> return get_pfnblock_flags() & PB_migrate_skip_bit;
>>>>
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe, we should convert set_pfnblock_flags_mask() to
>>>>>>
>>>>>> void set_clear_pfnblock_flags(struct page *page, unsigned long
>>>>>> 			      set_flags, unsigned long clear_flags);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And better, splitting it up (or providing helpers)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> set_pfnblock_flags(struct page *page, unsigned long flags);
>>>>>> clear_pfnblock_flags(struct page *page, unsigned long flags);
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This implies some more code cleanups first that make the code easier to extend.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The same due to PB_migrate_skip.
>>>>>
>>>>> Based on your suggestion, we could make {set,get}_pfnblock_flags_mask()
>>>>> internal APIs by prepending "__". They are only used by the new
>>>>> {get, set, clear}_pfnblock_flags() and {get, set, clear}_pageblock_{skip, isolate}().
>>>>> Then use {get, set, clear}_pfnblock_flags() for all migratetype operations.
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> In general, lgtm. I just hope we can avoid the "_mask" part and just handle it in these functions directly?
>>>
>>> After implementing {get, set, clear}_pfnblock_flags(), I find that
>>> get_pfnblock_flags() is easy like you wrote above, but set and clear are not,
>>> since migratetype and skip/isolate bits are in the same word, meaning
>>> I will need to first read them out, change the field, then write them back.
>>
>> Like existing set_pfnblock_flags_mask() I guess, with the try_cmpxchg() loop.
> 
> Are you saying I duplicate the code in set_pfnblock_flags_mask() to implement
> set_pfnblock_flags()? Or just replace set_pfnblock_flags_mask() entirely?

The latter as possible.

> 
>>
>>> But it will cause inconsistency if there is a parallel writer to the same
>>> word. So for set and clear, mask is required.
>>>
>>> I can try to implement {get, set, clear}_pfnblock_bits(page,pfn, bits) to
>>> only handle standalone bits by using the given @bits as the mask and
>>> {set,get}_pageblock_migratetype() still use the mask.
>>
>> We'd still have to do the try_cmpxchg() when dealing with multiple bits, right?
>>
>> For single bits, we could just use set_bit() etc.
> 
> Mel moved from set_bit() to try_cmpxchg() a word for performance reason. I am
> not sure we want to move back.

In e58469bafd05 we moved from multiple set_bit etc to a cmpxchange.

-       for (; start_bitidx <= end_bitidx; start_bitidx++, value <<= 1)
-               if (flags & value)
-                       __set_bit(bitidx + start_bitidx, bitmap);
-               else
-                       __clear_bit(bitidx + start_bitidx, bitmap);


However, when only setting/clearing a single bit (e.g., isolated), 
set_bit etc should be much cheaper.

For multiple bits, the existing try_cmpxchg should be kept IMHO.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb


  reply	other threads:[~2025-05-21 12:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-09 20:01 [PATCH v4 0/4] Make MIGRATE_ISOLATE a standalone bit Zi Yan
2025-05-09 20:01 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] mm/page_isolation: make page isolation " Zi Yan
2025-05-13 11:32   ` Brendan Jackman
2025-05-13 14:53     ` Zi Yan
2025-05-19  8:08   ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-19 15:08     ` Zi Yan
2025-05-19 16:42       ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-19 17:15         ` Zi Yan
2025-05-21 11:16         ` Zi Yan
2025-05-21 11:57           ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-21 12:00             ` Zi Yan
2025-05-21 12:11               ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2025-05-21 12:18                 ` Zi Yan
2025-05-09 20:01 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] mm/page_isolation: remove migratetype from move_freepages_block_isolate() Zi Yan
2025-05-12  6:25   ` kernel test robot
2025-05-12 16:10   ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-05-12 16:13     ` Zi Yan
2025-05-12 16:19       ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-05-12 16:28         ` Zi Yan
2025-05-12 22:00     ` Andrew Morton
2025-05-12 23:20     ` Zi Yan
2025-05-19  8:21   ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-19 23:06     ` Zi Yan
2025-05-20  8:58       ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-09 20:01 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] mm/page_isolation: remove migratetype from undo_isolate_page_range() Zi Yan
2025-05-09 20:01 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] mm/page_isolation: remove migratetype parameter from more functions Zi Yan
2025-05-17 20:21   ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-05-18  0:07     ` Zi Yan
2025-05-18 16:32   ` Johannes Weiner
2025-05-18 17:24     ` Zi Yan
2025-05-17 20:26 ` [PATCH v4 0/4] Make MIGRATE_ISOLATE a standalone bit Vlastimil Babka
2025-05-18  0:20   ` Zi Yan
2025-05-19 14:15     ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-19 14:35       ` Zi Yan
2025-05-20  8:58         ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-20 13:18           ` Zi Yan
2025-05-20 13:20             ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-20 13:31               ` Zi Yan
2025-05-20 13:33                 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-20 14:07                   ` Zi Yan
2025-05-19  7:44 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-05-19 14:01   ` Zi Yan

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=e9b85836-b4d9-4678-a59b-dbaf916fa1c5@redhat.com \
    --to=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=jackmanb@google.com \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=richardycc@google.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=ziy@nvidia.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).