From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: tim@xen.org, sstabellini@kernel.org, wei.liu2@citrix.com,
George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com,
ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] mm: Do not discard already-scrubbed pages if softirqs are pending
Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 13:18:58 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <29805238-8fec-e009-178c-dde6d6f2d64c@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <590B68280200007800156E81@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
On 05/04/2017 11:43 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 14.04.17 at 17:37, <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> wrote:
>> While scrubbing from idle loop, check for softirqs every 256 pages.
>> If softirq is pending, don't scrub any further and merge the
>> partially-scrubbed buddy back into heap by breaking the clean portion
>> into smaller power-of-2 chunks. Then repeat the same process for the
>> dirty part.
> This is ugly, as it gets us back into the state where full merge
> opportunities aren't being realized, just that the time window
> may be smaller now. As hinted at before, is there no way to
> flag the first page needing scrubbing alongside the head
> indicating that _some_ page needs scrubbing? The pages are
> all free, so if there's no other suitable storage, the head page
> itself could serve as such. But instead of a flag in struct
> page_info, perhaps you could store a (relatively small) integer?
How will it help? Even if we know what the fist dirty page is we still
may have to drop scrubbing if irq is pending. We simply will not have to
scan the buddy until first dirty page is found.
Or perhaps I don't understand what you are suggesting.
-boris
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-04 17:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-14 15:37 [PATCH v3 0/9] Memory scrubbing from idle loop Boris Ostrovsky
2017-04-14 15:37 ` [PATCH v3 1/9] mm: Separate free page chunk merging into its own routine Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-04 9:45 ` Jan Beulich
2017-04-14 15:37 ` [PATCH v3 2/9] mm: Place unscrubbed pages at the end of pagelist Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-04 10:17 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-04 14:53 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-04 15:00 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-08 16:41 ` George Dunlap
2017-05-08 16:59 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-04-14 15:37 ` [PATCH v3 3/9] mm: Scrub pages in alloc_heap_pages() if needed Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-04 14:44 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-04 15:04 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-04 15:36 ` Jan Beulich
2017-04-14 15:37 ` [PATCH v3 4/9] mm: Scrub memory from idle loop Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-04 15:31 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-04 17:09 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-05 10:21 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-05 13:42 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-05 14:10 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-05 14:14 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-05 14:27 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-05 14:51 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-05 15:23 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-05 16:05 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-05 16:49 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-08 7:14 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-11 10:26 ` Dario Faggioli
2017-05-11 14:19 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-11 15:48 ` Dario Faggioli
2017-05-11 17:05 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-12 8:17 ` Dario Faggioli
2017-05-12 14:42 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-04-14 15:37 ` [PATCH v3 5/9] mm: Do not discard already-scrubbed pages if softirqs are pending Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-04 15:43 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-04 17:18 ` Boris Ostrovsky [this message]
2017-05-05 10:27 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-05 13:51 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-05 14:13 ` Jan Beulich
2017-04-14 15:37 ` [PATCH v3 6/9] spinlock: Introduce spin_lock_cb() Boris Ostrovsky
2017-04-14 15:37 ` [PATCH v3 7/9] mm: Keep pages available for allocation while scrubbing Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-04 16:03 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-04 17:26 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-05 10:28 ` Jan Beulich
2017-04-14 15:37 ` [PATCH v3 8/9] mm: Print number of unscrubbed pages in 'H' debug handler Boris Ostrovsky
2017-04-14 15:37 ` [PATCH v3 9/9] mm: Make sure pages are scrubbed Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-05 15:05 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-08 15:48 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2017-05-08 16:23 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-02 14:46 ` [PATCH v3 0/9] Memory scrubbing from idle loop Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-02 14:58 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-02 15:07 ` Boris Ostrovsky
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=29805238-8fec-e009-178c-dde6d6f2d64c@oracle.com \
--to=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).